crawford.p65 216 College & Research Libraries May 2001 Best-Sellers in Academic Libraries Gregory A. Crawford and Matthew Harris Libraries have important collection development decisions to make about best-sellers and popular culture materials. A selection of academic li­ braries was studied to follow the ownership of best-sellers from 1940 to 1990. The trend is to keep a higher percentage of older best-sellers in fiction than newer ones. Nonfiction appears to be more sporadic but still follows this basic trend. With the influx of popular culture studies, schol­ ars potentially could lose valuable resources. From this study, libraries will see that a new set of collection development policies may need to be developed. ne of the mainstays of public libraries in the United States has been their provision of best-sellers to their customers. Because these works are a reflection of the time and culture in which they were pro­ duced, they also can be an important re­ source for academic libraries. However, academic libraries generally do not col­ lect such material, and if they do, they often discard it when its circulation slows or when it stops mirroring the practices of public libraries. This raises the ques­ tion of whether this part of our cultural heritage is being lost. Are academic librar­ ies keeping these materials for the use of scholars in the future? The goal of this research was to exam­ ine ownership of best-sellers within a group of academic libraries. Literature Review The ongoing debate within any library is the struggle over what should be kept and what should be thrown away. Many jour­ nals and books on collection development and weeding have tackled this issue, but a more specific question has been posed that takes this discussion to a more fren­ zied level. Best-sellers are a draw for li­ braries, especially public libraries. But when are best-sellers no longer needed? Should libraries become the storage cen­ ter for popular culture? One approach to the problem was discussed in a recent interview with retired Baltimore County public librarians Charlie Robinson and The idea of collection development raises the distinct probability that best-sellers will remain in the library only until they stop circulating. Jean-Barry Molz. Their ideas are based on the philosophy that libraries should “give ‘em what they want.” This philosophy provides libraries with a customer-ori­ ented approach to collection development that allows for more best-sellers and a quicker way to get rid of them when they no longer circulate. Robinson com­ mented: “We made sure, under the direc­ tion of the trustees, that we had enough money for books so that we bought an Gregory A. Crawford is Head of Public Affairs in the Library at Penn State Harrisburg; e-mail: gac2@psu.edu. Matthew Harris is an Adjunct Faculty Member at Harrisburg Area Community College; e-mail: subversion@disinfo.net. 216 mailto:subversion@disinfo.net mailto:gac2@psu.edu Best-Sellers in Academic Libraries 217 awful lot of best-sellers. And the other thing we do is throw them away when they become slow movers.”1 In an article entitled “If It Circulates, Keep It,” Ron Hayden examined a weeding program.2 This program leads to getting rid of the books that do not circulate for whatever reason, such as being too obscure, too old, or too unattractive. However, this be­ comes a problem when best-sellers and pop culture materials are examined. How long should a library keep a best-seller, and should the library keep everything? The idea of collection development raises the distinct probability that best- sellers will remain in the library only until they stop circulating. Should they be trashed because of waning popularity, or should they be kept to secure their pres­ ervation for future library users? Popu­ lar culture studies have inculcated the idea that everything may eventually be important and libraries need to collect as much of everything as possible. The hot­ test topics seem to involve defining what “everything” includes. In “Not Just Pulp Fiction,” by Eric A. Johnson and Coleen R. C. Stumbaugh, science fiction is em­ braced as a necessity for saving.3 The Li­ brary of Congress (LOC) has an ability that no other library has— the inalienable right to collect and keep everything. It could be called the Noah’s Arc of librar­ ies. What is interesting about the Johnson–Stumbaugh article is that science fiction is being elevated to the plateau of the needed works. We need to keep Isaac Asimov and Star Wars because they offer us insight into our culture that would be lost if we were to get rid of every piece of science fiction. However, not every library can be the LOC. What position should other librar­ ies take that are faced with issues of space and realistic collection development? Do public libraries need to keep best-sellers? Do university libraries need to collect comic books? Jack A. Clarke’s article, “Popular Culture in Libraries,” demon­ strated the possibilities of including pop culture in libraries but also pointed out the drawbacks.4 He commented, “The sheer mass and variety of these publica­ tions is so vast that it is beyond the physi­ cal capacity of even the largest library to acquire more than a fraction of the total output.”5 He went on to discuss how li­ braries pick certain areas in which to de­ velop their collections and how problems arise because of the fragile and flammable condition of these items. Clarke contin­ ued, “The best hope for the future of this new discipline seems to lie in the fact that a meaningful dialogue has already begun on many campuses across the country.”6 Clarke’s sentiments were echoed in Will­ iam L. Schurk’s piece, “Popular Culture and Libraries: A Practical Perspective.” Schurk added the timeliness of the col­ lections to the discussion: “Immediacy is another important factor…. Even though historical perspective must be considered, currency of fads, fashions, and foibles must be included in the spectrum of col­ lection building profiles.”7 Popular cul­ ture has become the new wave in academia and with it comes the problem of access. Who has these collections, and why? Two works have presented different sides to the discussion. The first is a paper en­ titled “The Public Library as a Popular Materials Center,” by Loriene Roy, and the second is an article entitled “Trash or Treasure? Pop Fiction in Academic and Research Libraries,” by Robert G. Sewell.8, 9 Roy tackled the public library’s respon­ sibilities. Her paper chronicled the rise of the pop culture movement and the his­ tory of its inclusion in public libraries. Her conclusion centered on the public library’s struggle to be like an academic library and yet have the appeal of a mega- chain bookstore. Either way, popular cul­ ture materials only enter the public library in an attempt to compete with the chain stores or as a way to secretly sway more readers to experience the more academic side of the public library. In this situation, the library keeps what it needs to keep going. Sewell, on the other hand, looked at the academic library’s responsibility with regard to collecting popular culture. He 218 College & Research Libraries saw a different role for the already-estab­ lished academic and research libraries; his problem lay in defining where they stop collecting. Sewell provided excellent background on what individual libraries are keeping in terms of pop culture. He established that these libraries should be collecting popular culture materials but left out exactly what should be kept. It seems that personal taste is the deciding factor for every library. If a faculty mem­ ber is a die-hard comic book purveyor, the library should have an extensive collec­ tion for him to rummage through. Sewell presented three main aspects to collect­ ing popular culture material that would be deciding factors in this issue for years to come. First, funding is limited for popular culture collection. Sewell com­ mented, “Most academic libraries rely heavily, if not exclusively, on donations for popular culture resources.”10 The is­ sue becomes: Is the best-seller a necessity, or should the library take its chances on the book being donated? Another aspect is the problem of cataloging. Basically, this argument comes down to time, personal taste, and accessibility. The final aspect is preservation of the items. Here again, pop culture does not always come hardbound. Sewell concluded his article by saying, “Academic and research libraries have diverse responsibilities and demands made upon them. Crucial decisions are being and will be made concerning what to collect and preserve of our cultural heritage.”11 The consensus remains up in the air. Some argue that best-sellers should be kept only as long as they circulate; others argue that they should be kept forever to preserve our cultural heritage. Some even take the culturally elitist view that best- sellers should be kept only if they become classics. And so the arguments continue; some best-sellers are kept, and others find their way out of the collection and are lost to future researchers. Method First, a list of best-sellers needed to be identified. To do this, the researchers used May 2001 the Publishers Weekly listing of best-sell­ ers for selected years as reported in 80 Years of Best-Sellers, by Alice Payne Hackett and James Henry Burke, and The Bowker Annual of Library & Book Trade In­ formation.12, 13 The top ten fiction and non­ fiction titles for every fifth year, beginning in 1940 and ending in 1990, were included in the study. This sample yielded a total of 220 titles. To determine ownership of these best- sellers by academic libraries, the union catalog of libraries that were members of the Associated College Libraries of Cen­ tral Pennsylvania (ACLCP) was searched for each individual title. The ACLCP union catalog represents the holdings of twenty academic and research libraries. Of these, thirteen are private colleges or universities and seven are public institu­ tions, including the State Library of Penn­ sylvania. At the time of the study, the smallest collection numbered approxi­ mately 86,000 volumes (Alvernia College) and the largest numbered 987,000 (State Library of Pennsylvania). The average number of volumes held by these librar­ ies was approximately 250,000. Upon searching the union catalog, the total number of libraries owning a copy of each work was recorded. Searching was restricted by publication date to one year prior to a work appearing on the best-seller list to one year afterward. This, of course, eliminated other printings of individual titles, but the goal was to determine own­ ership of original editions as they appeared at the time they were included on the best- seller list. Thus, a 1985 edition of For Whom the Bell Tolls would not have been counted, but an edition published between 1939 and 1941 would have. Results Among the 110 works of fiction listed as best-sellers between 1940 and 1990, all but one was owned by at least one ACLCP library. The average number of libraries owning each work was 8.6. The most fre­ quently owned titles included For Whom the Bell Tolls (20), Up the Down Staircase (18), Herzog (18), and Humboldt’s Gift (17). http:formation.12 Best-Sellers in Academic Libraries 219 FIGURE 1 Fiction Titles Title Year Ownership Princess Daisy 1980 0 The Family 1940 1 A Lion Is in the Streets 1945 1 Star Money 1950 1 The Chapman Report 1960 1 The Secret Woman 1970 1 Random Winds 1980 1 Secrets 1985 1 Lucky 1985 1 Rage of Angels 1980 2 Jubal Sackett 1985 2 Memories of Midnight 1990 2 Lady Boss 1990 2 Night in Bombay 1940 3 The Robe 1945 3 The Spike 1980 3 If Tomorrow Comes 1985 3 Message from Nam 1990 3 Earth and High Heaven 1945 4 Joy Street 1950 4 Floodtide 1950 4 The Man with the Golden Gun 1965 4 The Bourne Identity 1980 4 The Key to Rebecca 1980 4 Family Album 1985 4 The Witching Hour 1990 4 Stars on the Sea 1940 5 Jubilee Trail 1950 5 The Constant Image 1960 5 The Listener 1960 5 Rich Man, Poor Man 1970 5 The Choirboys 1975 5 The Eagle Has Landed 1975 5 The Devil's Alternative 1980 5 Skeleton Crew 1985 5 The Bourne Ultimatum 1990 5 Forever Amber 1945 6 The Adventurer 1950 6 Not As a Stranger 1955 6 The Moneychangers 1975 6 The Great Train Robbery 1975 6 Firestarter 1980 6 The Fifth Horseman 1980 6 The Stand: Complete and Uncut Edition 1990 6 September 1990 6 Hotel 1965 7 Great Lion of God 1970 7 220 College & Research Libraries May 2001 FIGURE 1 (Continued) Fiction Titles Title Year Ownership The Gang that Couldn't Shoot Straight 1970 7 The White Tower 1945 8 Captain from Castile 1945 8 The Cardinal 1950 8 No Time for Sergeants 1955 8 The Looking Glass War 1965 8 The Crystal Cave 1970 8 QB VII 1970 8 The Mammoth Hunters 1985 8 The Parasites 1950 9 Auntie Mame 1955 9 The Lovely Ambition 1960 9 The Green Berets 1965 9 Don't Stop the Carnival 1965 9 Looking for Mister Goodbar 1975 9 Shogun 1975 9 Contact 1985 9 The Plains of Passage 1990 9 Four Past Midnight 1990 9 The Burden of Proof 1990 9 The Black Rose 1945 10 Trustee from the Toolroom 1960 10 Curtain 1975 10 The Greek Treasure 1975 10 Texas 1985 10 Mrs. Miniver 1940 11 The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit 1955 11 Ourselves to Know 1960 11 The Ambassador 1965 11 Kitty Foyle 1940 12 The Nazarene 1940 12 The Grapes of Wrath 1940 12 So Well Remembered 1945 12 Immortal Wife 1945 12 Something of Value 1955 12 The Tontine 1955 12 Hawaii 1960 12 Bonjour Tristesse 1955 13 Ragtime 1975 13 The Covenant 1980 13 Cass Timberlane 1945 14 The Wall 1950 14 The Disenchanted 1950 14 Majorie Morningstar 1955 14 Advise and Consent 1960 15 The Leopard 1960 15 Those Who Love 1965 15 Best-Sellers in Academic Libraries 221 FIGURE 1 (Continued) Fiction Titles Title Year Ownership The French Lieutenant's Woman Islands in the Stream Travels with My Aunt Lake Wobegon Days How Green was My Valley Oliver Wiswell Across the River and Into the Trees Andersonville Ten North Frederick Sermons and Soda-Water The Source Love Story Humboldt's Gift Up the Down Staircase Herzog For Whom the Bell Tolls 1970 1970 1970 1985 1940 1940 1950 1955 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1965 1965 1940 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 18 18 20 Another eight titles were owned by six­ teen libraries, and another seven were owned by fifteen libraries. No library within the ACLCP owned a copy of Prin­ cess Daisy. Among the least frequently owned titles, four were held by two li­ braries, five by three libraries, and eight by eight libraries. Figure 1 provides the entire list of fiction titles, the year each was on the best-seller list, and the num­ ber of libraries that owned each one. Among nonfiction works, 105 (87.5%) were owned and fifteen (12.5%) were not. The average number of libraries owning a specific title was 7.4. The most fre­ quently owned titles were Markings (20), The Family of Man (20), Iacocca: An Autobi­ ography (19), A Thousand Days (19), and The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (19). Another two titles were owned by eighteen librar­ ies. The least frequently owned books in­ cluded fifteen that no library owned, among them, The Frugal Gourmet and Wealth without Risk. Sixteen other titles were owned by only one library. These included The Ascent of Man, Campus Zoo, and Elvis and Me. Figure 2 provides the entire list of nonfiction titles, the year each was on the best-seller list, and the num­ ber of libraries that owned each one. An additional analysis was performed to determine average ownership, by year, for both fiction and nonfiction. As figure 3 shows, average ownership fluctuates, but the overall trend is to own a higher percentage of older fiction best-sellers and relatively fewer more current ones. The ownership of nonfiction is spottier, al­ though the general trend is to own older nonfiction titles, as well. Implications Are libraries discarding or not even collect­ ing a part of our cultural heritage, namely, the best-selling fiction and nonfiction lit­ erature? The results of this small study seem to indicate that this may indeed be the case. Although only one fiction title was not owned within the ACLCP, it is inter­ esting—and shocking—to note that fifteen nonfiction titles were not owned. Although this research examined the collections of only a convenient sample of libraries, these libraries do represent a variety of types of institutions, from lib­ eral arts colleges to comprehensive uni­ versities. The collections of the larger re­ search universities may indeed include these items, providing scholars of the fu­ ture with access to them. 222 College & Research Libraries May 2001 FIGURE 2 Nonfiction Titles Title Year Ownership Bet It's a Boy 1940 0 Dear Sir 1945 0 The Baby 1950 0 Look Younger, Live Longer 1950 0 A Man Called Peter 1955 0 Better Homes and Gardens Diet Book 1955 0 Year of Decisions 1955 0 Folk Medicine 1960 0 Better Homes and Gardens First Aid for Your Family 1960 0 Better Homes and Gardens Decorating Ideas 1960 0 Shelley Also Knows Shirley 1980 0 The Frugal Gourmet 1985 0 Dr. Berger's Immune Power Diet 1985 0 Better Homes and Gardens New Cook Book 1990 0 Wealth without Risk: How to Develop a Personal Fortune wlo Going Out. 1990 0 Betty Crocker's Picture Cook Book 1950 1 How I Raised Myself from Failure to Success in Selling 1950 1 Your Dream Home 1950 1 Campus Zoo 1950 1 The General Foods Kitchens Cookbook 1960 1 Better Homes and Gardens Dessert Book 1960 1 Between You, Me, and the Gatepost 1960 1 How to Be a Jewish Mother 1965 1 Happiness Is a Dry Martini 1965 1 Better Homes and Gardens Fondue and Tabletop Cooking 1970 1 The Ascent of Man 1975 1 Nothing Down 1980 1 Elvis and Me 1985 1 The Be-Happy Attitudes 1985 1 Dancing in the Light 1985 1 I Never Played the Game 1985 1 I Kid You Not 1960 2 My Shadow Ran Fast 1965 2 The Sensuous Woman 1970 2 Caught in the Quiet 1970 2 The Sky's the Limit 1980 2 Craig Claiborne's Gourmet Diet 1980 2 Financial Self-Defense: How to Win the Fight for Financial Freedom 1990 2 Bo Knows Bo 1990 2 Ball Four 1970 3 Total Fitness in 30 Minutes a Week 1975 3 The Save-Your-Life Diet 1975 3 Best-Sellers in Academic Libraries 223 FIGURE 2 (Continued) Nonfiction Titles Title Year Ownership Homecoming: Reclaiming and Championing Your Inner Child 1990 3 The Power of Positive Thinking 1955 4 The Secret of Happiness 1955 4 Everything You Wanted to Know About Sex but Were Afraid to Ask 1970 4 Angels: God's Secret Agents 1975 4 Winning Through Intimidation 1975 4 The Frugal Gourmet on Our Immigrant Heritage: Recipes You Should. 1990 4 Land Below the Wind 1940 5 American White Paper 1940 5 How to Live 365 Days a Year 1955 5 May This House Be Safe from Tigers 1960 5 World Aflame 1965 5 In Someone's Shadow 1970 6 Crisis Investing: Opportunities and Profits in the Coming Great Depression 1980 6 Country Squire in the White House 1940 7 General Marshall's Report 1945 7 Thy Neighbor's Wife 1980 7 A Smattering of Ignorance 1940 8 Anything Can Happen 1945 8 Bring on the Empty Horses 1975 8 Fit for Life 1985 8 As I Remember Him 1940 9 Belles on Their Toes 1950 9 TM: Discovering Energy and Overcoming Stress 1975 9 Sylvia Porter's Money Book 1975 9 The Bermuda Triangle 1975 9 Yeager: An Autobiography 1985 9 A Life on the Road 1990 9 An American Life: An Autobiography 1990 9 A Gift of Prophecy 1965 10 Pleasant Valley 1945 11 Body Language 1970 11 I Married Adventure 1940 12 Black Boy 1945 12 The Mature Mind 1950 12 The New English Bible 1970 12 The Civil War 1990 12 How to Read a Book 1940 13 Try and Stop Me 1945 13 The Egg and I 1945 13 Mr. Jones, Meet the Master 1950 13 The Conscience of a Conservative 1960 13 Days of Our Years 1940 14 224 College & Research Libraries May 2001 FIGURE 2 (Continued) Nonfiction Titles Title Year Ownership The Thurber Carnival 1945 14 Kon-Tiki 1950 14 Gift from the Sea 1955 14 Cosmos 1980 14 New England: Indian Summer 1940 15 Why Johnny Can't Read 1955 15 Inside Africa 1955 15 Brave Men 1945 16 Up Front 1945 16 Breach of Faith: The Fall of Richard Nixon 1975 16 Anatomy of an Illness as Perceived by the Patient 1980 16 Megatrends 2000: The New Direction for the 1990's 1990 16 Kennedy 1965 17 The Making of the President 1965 17 Up the Organization 1970 17 American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 1970 17 Free to Choose: A Personal Statement 1980 17 The Third Wave 1980 17 Games People Play 1965 18 A Passion for Excellence: The Leadership Difference 1985 18 The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich 1960 19 A Thousand Days 1965 19 Iacocca: An Autobiography 1985 19 The Family of Man 1955 20 Markings 1965 20 Because of the difficulty of obtaining good data, this research did not attempt to determine whether the libraries in the study had ever owned titles and then with­ drawn them. If a library had owned these titles and had chosen to withdraw them, the question of collection manage­ ment policies needs to be raised. How­ ever, that is a question for a future study. Conclusions As this small study indicates, many im­ portant works of fiction and nonfiction may be in danger of becoming lost to future scholars. This research only ex­ amined works on the best-seller lists in the years after 1940. A more frighten­ ing scenario may appear for even older works because the Publishers Weekly best-sellers lists began in 1895. As this debate grows, libraries are be­ ing asked to define their roles within the community. Based on this study, aca­ demic libraries are faced with many dif­ ficulties in selecting what to include in FIGURE 3 Ownership Trends 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Average Fiction Average Non-Fiction 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 Best-Sellers in Academic Libraries 225 their collections and what to weed out. Best-sellers tend to find their way out of the libraries when they become outdated, but they find their way back in when they are deemed worthy of being included in the canon. With the rise of popular cul­ ture studies at many universities, these rules of inclusion are being questioned. The next step is to decide the capabilities of an academic library and who should be influencing the decision-making pro­ cess. Libraries can be storehouses of infor­ mation, but when does a storehouse be­ come a junkyard? Further research and evaluation of this situation may provide more insight into the actual collection de­ velopment process and allow libraries a better view of the importance of best-sell­ ers and popular culture materials. Fur­ thermore, new technology may permit a larger community of libraries to share such materials, allowing for greater ac­ cess and a larger storage capability. Notes 1. Nancy Pearl, “Gave ‘em What They Wanted,” Library Journal 121 (Sept. 1996): 136–38. 2. Ron Hayden, “If It Circulates, Keep It,” Library Journal 112 (June 1987): 80–82. 3. Eric A. Johnson and Coleen R. C. Stumbaugh, “Not Just Pulp Fiction: Science Fiction Inte­ gral to U.S. Culture and LC Collections,” Library of Congress Informational Bulletin 55 (Sept. 1996): 338–45. 4. Jack A. Clark, “Popular Culture in Libraries,” College & Research Libraries 34 (May 1973): 215–18. 5. Ibid., 216. 6. Ibid., 218. 7. William L. Schurk, “Popular Culture and Libraries: A Practical Perspective,” Drexel Li­ brary Quarterly 16 (July 1980): 43–52. 8. Loriene Roy, The Public Library as a Popular Materials Center. Paper presented at the Joint Meetings of the Popular Culture Associations and American Culture Association, San Antonio, Texas, Mar. 26–29, 1997. 9. Robert G. Sewell, “Trash or Treasure? Pop Fiction in Academic and Research Libraries,” College & Research Libraries 45 (Nov. 1984): 450–61. 10. Ibid., 459. 11. Ibid., 460. 12. Alice Payne Hackett and James Henry Burke, 80 Years of Best Sellers: 1985–1975 (New York: Bowker, 1977). 13. The Bowker Annual of Library & Book Trade Information (New York: Bowker, 1981, 1986, 1991).