3.1 Introduction
In this chapter I review major aspects of librarianship as a discipline. And the question I ask is, What were the major conceptual changes in the hi story of librarianship that affected the formation of the discipline?

Winger summarized major cultural factors in the process of changing the concept of librarianship as follows:

In its historical context, the role of the librarian has depended on the approach to knowledge . . . Conditioning factors in his task have been the range and complexity of records that were valued by a scholarship and a culture and the size and the differentiation of the aud ience. The variations in those factors and the personal emphasis librarians have placed on them account for historical changes in librarianship and for the proliferating specializations of today.1

The process of the changing conceptual purposes of the library can be divided into five broad categories, as
(a) a storehouse of knowledge in antiquity,
(b) a manuscript acquisition in the classical period,
(c) a preservation of classical literature b y chroniclers and compilers in the Middle Ages,
(d) a social agency serving cultural needs of the society in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and
(e) a sophisticated technology applied to all aspects of physical library records in the first half of the twentieth century, expanded to cover management of nonphysical contents of the records in the second part of this century.

The discussion revolves around the interrelationships between technical, cultural, and philosophical fac tors that influence the change. All of them overlap in time and are interwoven in the definition of librarianship.

3.1.1 Major Concepts in Librarianship
The cultural needs and technical means for communication shaped the conceptual paradigms of the discipline. Starting at the beginning of human history, the central conceptual notion of knowledge was that of a myth, which accounted for the mysteries of the immediate environment. The myth was explained metaphorically through oral communication based on past experiences, preserved in story-telling. The cave paintings expanded oral into visual communication, expressing human thoughts in the graphic medium of symbolic figures. The pictures impressed on the artifacts become storable. The technology of expressing the symbols in pictographic writing led to the creation of mental images of physical experiences. For the first time, decorative artifacts provided means for describing experiences that could be stored in separate places.

The introduction of the alphabet attached meaning to the signs and facilitated communication through symbols, allowing for more direct and economical recording and preserving of thoughts. The use of recording material, such as a clay tablet, papyrus, or parchment, introduced the concept of the generic book, which allowed for bringing together different concepts on a variety of subjects. The concept of discourse was introduced. The need to share recorded information led to the cultural acceptan ce of copying. This prompted development of duplicating techniques that culminated in the invention of print, followed by electronic reprographic devices. The concept of disseminating recorded knowledge becomes the main function of librarianship.

Social fear of new ideas propagated through print reinforced the need for cultural conformity, introducing censorship that scrutinized written material through content description and indexing of individual books. This is the beginning of the technical b ibliography.

Introduction of the machine to augment human muscles led to the industrial revolution's focus on efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources, and to the development of modern techniques for management of physical resources. A separate library division for technical services emerged.

A humanistic reaction to the economic exploitation of employees stressed the importance of social and environmental factors in production. This new awareness of human factors in serv ice to the patron was expressed first by the "public service" approach, later refocusing on specifically 'user-friendly' attitudes. Fast-expanding technology and especially the development of electronic computational machines produced the computer and the ability to manipulate the content of records.

3.1.2 Four Faces of Librarianship
In the course of the historical evolution of the concept of librarianship, the discipline acquired its four separate but interrelated dimensions as Libr ary, Library Science, Librarianship, and Information Science. They are illustrated in Fig. 3-1: Emerging subdivisions of librarianship, and discussed in this section. 2

Each of the subdivisions identified in the diagram parallels the cultural changes just described.

a. Library : In the first period of evolution, the focus of librarianship was on the process of production, acquisition, preservation, and storage of books. It was the age of the l ibrary and librarian as book-keeper, culminating in the emergence of the concept of disseminating the content of the records.

b. Library Science : The focus on bibliographic organization of records and advancements in reprography created a need for systematization of practices and for education in the technology of library operations. The theory of library science was formulated around the issue of the management of library resources.

c. Librarianship: With increasing demands for libr ary services for individual patrons as well as for society at large, awareness of librarians' social responsibility for their work and their mediating role prompted formation of professional standards. Librarianship became a separate and distinct profession, dedicated to the provision of information, by balancing the individual patron's and society's needs for this profession. This was the phase of the library as a community builder, linking sources of information with people, and it eventually led to the e mergence of the global village of library readers, with the library focusing on the communication function of ideas.

d. Information Science : The introduction of computers increased the library's ability to manipulate information records and to expand its services through networking. The focus on the process of disseminating the content of the records, independently of its format, introduced the concept of 'information transfer.'

It is worthwhile to note links among the subdivisions (ve rtices of each triangle in the diagram). They point out the continuity in the development of the discipline.

The high point in the development of each subdivision becomes the focal theme of the next subdivision. Thus, Library's emerged function of disseminating records becomes the concern of Library Science in developing theories about bibliographic organization of records. As an organized system, the Library becomes a profession of mediating between the records and their users. Mediation, as a p sychological activity, shifted the attention from physical aspects of information content of records, to the nature of information itself, leading to the emergence of Information Science.

The demarcation lines between the concepts of the Library, Library Science, Librarianship, and Information Science are vague. They demonstrate a lack of consensus, especially in differentiating between Library and Information Science. Protracted discussions and often pessimistic projections of the future role of librarianship, both within and outside the walls of the library, are the results of misunderstanding the paradigms of the discipline. In this chapter I provide a synoptic description of each subdiscipline's major conceptual themes, as a background for the study of similarities and differences between them in the next chapter.

3.2 The Library
Since the beginning of library history until recent times, the predominant focus of librarianship was on the book, its physical aspects, and its format. The main objective was to acquire and store books for their immediate and future use. The outward image of the discipline was the library building and its physical content. The discipline was associated with, and named after, the library. The term 'library' initially stood for reference studies and services. In the nineteenth century, the definition was expanded to include the building and its collection. Later, the term was used for the institution responsible for the management of the colle ction, represented by different types of libraries, each administering its services to different clienteles. [J.K. Gates, 1976]

H. Arntz (1983) reviewed various theories about the emergence of man, arguing that the most important stage in that emergence was the process of acquisition, storage, and conceptualization of information. In his study, called a 'palaeology of information,' Arntz maintained that information pressure, initiated by the need for survival, created craving for adequate new in formation. 'Being informed' counteracts natural laws of Darwinian selection. This basic, almost biological need for information is reflected in the expanded individual human brain's storage capacity, while the society's response to the aggregate information needs led to the creation of the concept of Library.

3.2.1 Changing Library Image
The evolving nature of the Library as an institution is characterized by a gradual change of its organization. The change itself was prompted by the chan ging format of records stored in libraries: from clay tablets, to papyrus, to parchment, to paper, to nonprint and electronic data.

The fact that the improved physical formats of records made them more transmittable facilitated their use, and demand for books increased significantly stimulating production of new records. At the same time, however, the new formats became less permanent, requiring special preservation procedures for original records and new technologies for their reproduction.

The concept of the completeness of a collection and expanded acquisition activities in the Assurbanipal Library were reflected in the constant demand for a variety of clay tablets. Papyrus made copying and translation of documents possible, while parchment added portability to books, which were soon used for everyday, inspirational purposes. The new format facilitated the use of books in cathedral schools and in the scholarly pursuit of knowledge in colleges. In the fifteenth century mechanical print ing allowed for inexpensive multicopy reproductions of an author's works. The rapidly expanding utility of books created, in turn, a need for improved management of records, leading to classificatory systems, cataloging rules, and bibliographic control. Technological changes continued at an accelerated rate, introducing multiple media, such as microformats, nonprint disks, electronic data files and optical storage disks. New information formats require specialized knowledge for managing the records contain ed in them and for providing reference services to use them. The preference for new book formats was not always the immediate reason for accepting technological change. For example, Anderson questions the belief that codex owed its existence to the substitution of vellum (parchment) for papyrus, as a strong material that allowed for writing on both sides of the page. Actually, papyrus was also sturdy, durable, and flexible and was used for a long time interchangeably with parchment in rolls and codexe s. [Anderson, 1988]

Anderson argues that the use of codexes grew slowly. In the first century A.D. less than one percent of manuscripts were codexes; in the second century their number increased to two percent, and to three percent in the third century. It was not until the fifth century that most (90 percent) of manuscripts were codexes. However, among Christian biblical manuscripts 91.9 percent were codices in the first four centuries; by comparison, 91.1 percent of manuscripts used by Greeks were rolls. The ratio of rolls to codices in the first four centuries B.C. suggested to Anderson that the book form was introduced primarily to distinguish Christian writings from those of Jewish and other religions' literature.

It was not, therefore, exclusively the technical innovation in writing material from papyrus to parchment, nor the physical shortcomings of the roll, which led to the discarding of papyrus and a change from roll to codex form, but a cultural environment. Anderson reminds us that it took 300 years for people to become sufficiently convinced of the physical advantage of the book format that it was accepted by other cultures. Another important factor in library evolution was the economics of the book market, determined by the availability of recorded information. In the medieval era, books were purchased from peddlers, an unreliable but popular source for providing forbidden books. Book loans became the substitutions for expensive ownership of books, which was limited to pri vileged classes. The concept of book-lending was instituted by a stationer as an authorized source for rental and purchase of manuscripts. An increased demand for books among the people of the middle classes expanded copying and manufacturing activities. The growing number of printed books at a lower cost led to the organization of printers' guilds aimed at the protection of their trade and their staple, the limited editions. Availability of book replacement made 'catenati' (chained books) unnecessary, wh ile sturdy binding changed storage methods, from flat to upright shelving, and at the same time improving browsing. The multiplicity of subjects published prompted philosophical 'mapping' of knowledge into classes, and the development of the science of classification followed. Finally, duplication of copies replaced exclusive ownership of books by members of royalty, nobility, and religious orders by creating public ownership of printed material.

Recent technical changes in library operations ca used some confusion in interpreting the library's new social role. The traditional view that librarians are agents of culture (Burke, 1953) and missionaries of values (Gardner, 1964) was considered by some reformers out of step with social changes. Yet the requirements of change are ambivalent; in an age characterized by specialization, librarians are expected to act not only as generalists but also as humanists to compensate for the impersonal, automated library in an age of mechanization, and as individu alists in an age of conformity (Harwell, 1960).

Others see Library as a system for assembling records, for developing and disseminating information services, which are open to environmental influences and human interaction (McMahon, 1977); or as an information system generating, collecting, storing, manipulating, and delivering data and objects (Heiliger, 1971). The original simple mission to acquire and organize books is now expanded to other information resources not found within the traditiona l library.

With the anticipated disappearance of the traditional library by the year 2000, few institutions will act as passive archives of printed material. The focus will have to change from the physical library to the librarian as information specialist, free from association with a particular building or collection. Nevertheless, the library will always retain two primary functions: as a repository of recorded history, and as a communication agent (Oboler, 1976), modified by a changing ext ernal environment. Hence, there is a need for historical perspectives in understanding these changes (Robson, 1976).

Furthermore, the library's future depends entirely on public demand for its services. Thus, in times of change, 'selling' the library mission to its patrons is a prerequisite for survival. It can be accomplished only by close contact with library users, through better service and intelligent public relations programs.

3.2.2 Evolving Library Objectives
Libra ry objectives always closely reflected societal and cultural needs of the period. The table below summarizes the evolution of library goals, their implementation, and the societal reaction to them.

Ornament

Objectives	17-18 c.	18-19 c.	19-20 c.
Goals	To read	To educate	To mediate
Policies regarding informatio n	Availability	Usefulness	Availability & Usefulness for diversified purposes
Major Activities	Storage	Internal Organization	Cooperation between libraries
public reaction	Toleration of Library	Acceptance of Library	Participation in Activities of Library
Library's perception	Utility	Tool

FIG. 3-2: The Evolving Objectives of the Librarianship.3

The overall pattern of library objectives emerged in a premodern period with the focus on physical records, books. The scope of librarianship gradually enlarged into an educational and mediative role for the library as a cultural unit serving society as a whole.

In the period of cultural enlightenment, libra ry involvement in the affairs of its community began with emphasis on the value of reading for its own sake. It was extended to the humanistic notion of the individual patron's self-improvement, which would, in turn, strengthen the general will of the society. The library's goal was to encourage reading, especially of 'good' books.

Changes in library technology reflected the philosophy of the industrial revolution based on the faith in science and technology. A continuous focus on reading as a cure for social maladies was reaffirmed, based on a belief that all social problems were caused by violation of the laws of nature. The library was expected to educate its patrons by selecting books best suited to their needs.

Contemporary preoccupation with multiculturalism in democratic systems explains library relativism in both its politics and philosophy. It calls for a complete involvement of Library as a social institution in the affairs of the society to assist in minimizing ensuing conflicts between group interests. The library is expected to mediate between the often-conflicting needs of different groups within the society, by balancing its collection so that opposite views of issues of interest to its patrons are available to them.

[Fig.3-3]: Relationships between patrons' needs and library professional services <
Library patrons' pressures on the library take the form of threefold requests:
(1) for serv ice, to provide requested material (patron knows what he/she wants),
(2) for education, by providing instruction to identify material on a specific subject (patron wants to know what record he/she should consult), and
(3) for arbitration, asking the librarian to select among alternative materials.

The library as a social institution cannot ignore or succumb to any single public interest pressure, but response to such pressure, in and of itself, is a sine qua non of library existen ce. It has to be incorporated in any library theory. Its practical application implies an active participation in the affairs of its community, not only in response to pressures, but also in imposing on society its own pressures for resources and rights for serving, educating, and mediating public interests of the society.

On the premise that knowledge is power, some librarians argue for a library role as an agent of change, aggressively imposing the library's preferred ideology on the communi ty by manipulating library resources toward that end. Recent attempts in this direction have failed, and will probably continue to fail until the society develops a consensus on a desirable information ideology. The philosophical question is how to verify the value of the change before it takes place.

A corresponding focus in library philosophy is reflected in the metalibrary model which identifies the main dimensions in interpreting the library intellectual environment:
(a) t he procedural approach reflects the heritage of the age when science was preoccupied with improving the physical aspects of human conditions;
(b) the contextual approach stresses the problem-solving methods reflected in the contemporary philosophy of relativism; and
(c) the conceptual approach, developed in the historical period of great optimism and faith in human potentialities, focuses on integrating library activities with the needs of its environment. By interrelating the above three app roaches, the library can fulfill its basic function of providing a proper intellectual environment for the total community of its users.

Hence the philosophy of librarianship emerges from the general philosophy, as a unique expression of intellectual environment developed specifically for an individual library patron's independent interpretation of reality through recorded knowledge.

3.3 Library Science
In his essay on the origin of Greek science, B. Farrington r eminds us that science started in prehistoric times as a result of efforts to master the environment. It "has its origin in techniques, in arts and crafts . . . its source is experience, its aims practical, its only test [was] that it works.4 This empirical and fragmentary knowledge was synthesized into a theory by early Greeks, making science "a logically coherent body of knowledge deduced from a limited number of principles."5 But the main unifying characteristic of scien ce is its affinity with the culture in which it is developing. "There is no such thing as science in vacuo. There is only the science of a particular society at a particular place and time."6

The origin of science is traced to pattern seeking. Patterns are "any sequence or arrangement of events in time or any set of phenomena in space so ordered as to be distinguishable from, or comparable to, any other sequence, arrangement or set."7 For example, the pattern in astronomy is a pattern of night and day, in physics, Newton's pattern is mutual relations of physical bodies; in biology, Mendel's theory of heredity is pattern-driven, and in librarianship, 'difficult reading' implies a difficulty in reconciling patterns between text and the reader.

Library science is often defined as a theory of library practices. With the increased complexity of library operations a need emerged for a theory to guide these operations. Librarianship is considered 'scientific' both as a method and as a subject domain. A constantly changing library environment modified the technology of its operations. Library science emerged from the accumulation of techniques, by responding to the social need to codify its processes. Hence library science is here identified with the changing technology.

C. H. Rawski argues that in order to know, we structure. For the medieval scholar the logical order 'imposed from without' had become the property of the system, reflecting coherence and interdependence among different disciplines. The objectives of a scientific discipline are expressed in its definition, which, in turn, influences new inquiry within that definition. We cannot arbitrarily decide where and how to delimit a field (Rawski, 1973).

Library science, as a science, is conceived as a conscious collection or acquisition of data interpreted by means of definition, analysis, and classification (Mukherjee, 1966). More specifically, it is a systematic study of relationship s between bibliographic and informational aspects of knowledge, expressed in principles and laws that govern observable patterns.

3.3.1 Its Origins
In the beginning, the library was both a passive storehouse and an active publishing institution. Each function required technical 'know-how' and instruction. The Assurbanipal Library employed scribes and scholars to edit, revise, and copy texts. Medieval monasteries kept scholarship and books alive in libraries and scriptoria throughout the Dar k Ages. Abbot Theodore of Studium set up regulations for the operation of scriptoria, Cassiodorus established the first separate scriptorium in Calabria (Vivarium) and wrote the often-replicated rules for the monastery and its library.8

The very close connection between libraries and book production ended with the invention of movable type. From then on, the library's major contribution to the book industry was the bibliographic control of published material by producing printed catalogs and booklists, microfilming newspapers, and collecting recorded music and videotapes. With a new technology, however, librarians may be back to doing some form of publishing work: scanning documents into electronic format both for preservation and for dissemination purposes.

3.3.2 Its Scientific Character
The scientific method defines necessary procedures in the process of formulating relations. Librarians, similarly to any other scientists, collect and interpret data in terms of their relevance, arrange and classify them within a selected system, and verify the results in actual library practice.

Bibliography, classification, cataloging and reading are the four traditional subject matters of library science. They include processing, preserving, and storing carriers of information; selection and organization of resources; content analysis, indexing, retrieval, and bibliography. Librarianship studies the dissemination of the content of library collections to its patron s through direct circulation, through indirect loans, and through network sharing of resources. Finally, library science focuses on the management of library operations that include issues relating to the physical plant, staff administration, political environment, and resources (budget, etc.).

The beginnings of the development of modern library science can be traced to 1627 and Naude's writings on the management of library collections. Initially, the focus on the emerging science was not on th e discipline itself, but on the library. Naude in his Avis pour dresser une bibliotheque (1627), the first textbook on library management, discussed practical aspects of library organization, such as convenience of use, hospitality and the simplicity of library operations rather than their philosophical rationale.

Naude was also the first writer to recognize the librarian as a specialist in handling sources of information. His view reinforced the then-accepted role of librarians as sch olars and bookmen. It was not until the nineteenth century, when librarians like Martin Schrettinger began talking about the discipline of library science, focusing primarily on the history of books (F. A. Ebert).9

The first known library course was offered in 1886 by Karl Dziatzko at the University of Gottingen. Library science was then considered an auxiliary discipline (paleography), preparing students for scholarly libraries (Hessel, 1955). The first library school in t he United States was introduced in 1887 by M. Dewey at Columbia University; it focused on public library practices such as filing, shelving, and handwriting. In 1927 the Graduate Library School at Chicago (GLS) introduced its own sociological framework, with some probing into the philosophy of librarianship. It was the first library school to offer a Ph.D. program. On the other side of the Atlantic, British systems offered a program that compromised between the practical and scholarly approaches.

The major dimensions of library science are scientific, sociological, psychological, and applied (Butler, 1933), involved in collection, organization, and supply of intellectual resources, regardless of physical form or purpose (Shaw, 1967). Ortega y Gasset (1961) identified three stages in the development of the discipline:
(1) in the Middle Ages, the socialization of the book resulted in the expansion of its production and acquisition,
(2) in the nineteenth century, with a wider acceptanc e of the book, the library was recognized as a public function, and
(3) after 1934 the book became central, living function of the library. This was accompanied by the change of the name of 'Library Economy' to 'Library Science,' the term which today stands for library technology or engineering. The theoretical orientation shifted from scholarship to technological interest, weakening the public image of librarians [A. Khurshid, 1976].

3.3.3 Bibliographic Aspects of Library Science
T he bibliography developed as a tool to locate needed information rapidly and accurately. At first, its scope was limited to the records available in a specific library, later it extended to library networks.

The development of bibliography parallels the emergence of library science described above. It began by providing statistical data about publishing activities. During the fifteenth to sixteenth centuries, the bibliography was enumerative, with bibliographic scholarship concentrating on the history of publications. In the eighteenth century it developed into a science of paleography, deciphering ancient manuscripts. In the nineteenth century bibliography became a science of the book in all its forms, covering classification of knowledge and books and identifying library science with bibliography and book production. In 1934 bibliography returned to its original role: compiling lists of books and tracing their creation, purpose and distribution [L. N. Malcles, 1961].

Today, bibl iography includes the history, physical description, comparison, and classification of information-related records (print and nonprint). Initiated as an enumerative bibliography in antiquity, it evolved into descriptive classification (e.g., Dewey's system), analytical bibliography (e.g., Ranganathan's Colon Classification, 1963), applied theory of bibliographic organization, and subject specialization reflecting the specific needs of different institutions.

It is important not to confuse a descr iptive bibliography with a catalog. A bibliography compares each like object as a separate entity, while a catalog of a collection compares individual items as part of an assembly of records, from one source only.

The roles of bibliographers and historians are closely related. As noted by M. A. McCorison (1984), the historian is concerned with the content and the meaning of the recorded evidence, while the bibliographer takes the same evidence and interprets its impact on readers' perceptions of the content and its meaning. The historian focuses on the annotated bibliography, with no regard for its physical format; the bibliographer provides a physical description and the content of the source. A bibliographer's task is to explain to the potential user the significance of a particular publication, thus bridging the gap between librarians and historians. To quote Goethe, "without libraries there would be no history."10

3.3.4 Classification and Cataloging
The bib liographic, cataloging, and classificatory functions of library science are closely interrelated. A need for improved access to the collection resulted in the emergence of library catalogs (AD 700), and the increased subject matter of the records prompted development of classification and the use of classification symbols. The first known classification dates back to AD 281 in China. Modern classification began with Cassiodorus in AD 550, and with Roger Bacon in 1266. Francis Bacon's Chart of Human Lea rning, published in 1623, influenced several modern classification systems.

To classify means to arrange objects into groups according to common characteristics, leading to a classificatory science. The essence of all classification systems is to indicate all subjects referenced in any given document, and to identify all documents referred to a given subject.

Subject classification aims at dividing total knowledge into subcategories; a 'classed catalog' consists of subjects listed alphabetically. Additional alphabetical classification by author was introduced to accommodate changing subjects.

Until the nineteenth century, library classification followed the classification of contemporary philosophy. The eighteenth century was an age of systematization; in the natural sciences various species were arranged into classes by mutually shared characteristics, and newly discovered objects were described in terms of these classes. After the nineteenth century, knowledge was divided into levels, and each level into topics, listed in some order (D. J. Foskett, 1964). Contemporary classifications focus less on formal logic and more on anticipated use of material, as opposed to a previous metaphysical approach (M. F. Winter, 1988) 11 Yet, classification involves a practical question: "by what principle should books be physically placed relative to one another in linear continuity upon shelves?" This then is "transformed . . . into a rather sophisticated metaphysical pr oblem . . . [involving] both an elaborate theory of reality and theory of knowledge."12

Following this principle, E. E. Graziano analyzed the influence of Hegelian philosophy of reality on modern classificatory schema. He concluded that Harris and Dewey systems are both based on the Hegelian logic of dialectical forms of knowledge and reality, and only superficially relate to Francis Bacon's Classification of Knowledge into Memory, Imagination and Reason and its su bdivisions.

Grazianno writes, "The forms of knowledge, analytic and synthetic, are identical with the forms of objective reality . . . but the dialectical forms of knowledge always move in opposition to their corresponding dialectical forms of reality. Knowledge, as synthetic, can only apprehend the universe in its diversity. Conversely, knowledge as analytic can only understand a synthesized universe."13

Winter divided classification of library material into thre e groups.
(1) Deductive classification goes from general to specific subjects, such as Dewey's deductive classification system. Stiles proposed to decrease specificity in the classification of library material, which would lead to the increased probability of its retrieval, arguing that the more specific the subject, the less frequently it occurs. However, this is more true of books than documents, since most periodical articles are on specific subjects.
(2) Inductive classification is bas ed on generalized principles. Ranganathan's classification consists of intuitive principles referring to absolute categories. Facet classification arranges phenomena by homogeneous categories (facets); within each main class, facets are arranged by personality (product), matter (raw material), energy (processing operations), space (geographical subdivisions), and time (chronological subdivision). The categories are arranged in some sequence with notations allowing for combining items from different facets. This arrangement reflects the actual reader's approach to library material.
(3) Pragmatic classification, such as Library of Congress classification, adjusts to changing the paradigm of knowledge, For example, Vickery's categories are based on explicit analysis of subjects. His method consists of
(a) examination of literature to enumerate subjects of each article (e.g., substances, products, parts etc.);
(b) arrangement of these subjects as categories in order of importance to the subject (f acets); and
(c) enumeration of individual items in the content of the facets (Winter, 1988).

Ward focused on two philosophical issues related to classification theory. The first was a metaphysical issue of the kind of reality of the objects classified, their status as real or fiction. The second issue related to the epistemological nature of the definitions of the concepts that denote the classified objects. Thus these questions arise: "Are we to understand definitions as assertions which giv e descriptions of objects? Or should we take definitions as imperatives which prescribe rather than describe linguistic practices?"14

A. Broadfield pointed to the major issue in classification that directly relates to the interpretation of reality, discussed later in this book. "The problem of the theory of classification is that of discovering the logical bases of the various kinds of kinds, of which some are known a priori, while the knowledge of others is changeable ac cording to the results of research. One step towards a clearer understanding is made when we distinguish between the characters of things and the things whose characters they are." 15 As he noted, the characters of the things are easily confused with the things they characterized.

3.4 Librarianship

The suffix '-ship' in any word denotes a condition, an office, or a profession; thus it defines librarianship as an office, duties, or profession [Gates, 1976].

3.4 .1 Gradual Development
Librarianship as a profession was formally launched at the first national library conference on October 6, 1876, in Philadelphia. In that year the American Library Association was organized, the Library Bureau of ALA was established, and the first official survey of public libraries was included in the Bureau of Education Special Report 16

Historically, professional controls of library activities developed gradually. Prior to 1876, the plac e of the librarian in society and his control over his activities varied. In antiquity the librarian was a member of a privileged group, an educated scribe-priest, a polylinquist, and subject specialist serving as an advisor to those in power. In the Middle Ages, librarians fell from grace, performing the purely technical work of scribes and copyists. The social mission of librarianship emerged in 1876 and changed again the status of librarians. The new role was fortified by an introduction of technology sp ecifically designed for library processing of graphic records, thus separating librarians from other professions as a unique group [Thompson, 1977]. Professional library organizations strengthened the status of librarians by certifying membership in a group based on specific educational standards.

3.4.2 Major Changes in Library Functions
Before the introduction of the Uplift Theory (pre-1900), librarians were exclusively interested in the content of books. A major shift began in the 18th ce ntury, following a change from a rational and individual to a collective philosophy; individual consciousness was gradually replaced by group consciousness, changing 'I-awareness' attitude to one of 'we-awareness' [P. Karsted, 1954].17 This shift marks the beginning of modern librarianship.

Today, Librarianship is seen as a professional organization that processes and facilitates access to and use of information (M. Kochen, 1983), provides means of communication between knowledg e and people (Line, 1968), and mediates between different needs. "Mediation among records and users requires, in addition to communication, the ability to abstract the formal properties of documents from their contents . . . the interpretation of the content of the record is secondary to the organization of bodies of records by formal characteristics." 18 As a discipline, Librarianship cannot be fully explained in terms of itself alone (McGarry, 1975); it is defined as a process with soci al aims (Foskett, 1962) and, especially in public librarianship, as a social institution transmitting culture (Martin, 1937).19

The Library of Congress in the United States and the British Museum in England contributed significantly to the popularization of the book, its content, and the library profession. The two national libraries provided limited public access to records, employed scholars to organize the collections, developed public catalogs and cataloging rules, and beca me legal depositories of books published in their countries. 20

The emergence of public libraries followed. Special services were offered on both continents by providing, for example, new formats such as books for the blind (e.g., Braille, known as 'Gutenberg of the blind,' with his raised dots), talking books, and video books. The more recent concept of network approach to resource sharing was facilitated by online processing, reference, and retrieval of material.

3.4.3 Different Views of Librarianship
Approaches to a profession in general are expressed by three different theories: (a) the 'trait theory' considers a profession as an occupation with certain identified characteristics; (b) the 'functional theory' defines the profession as a process; and (c) the 'political theory' considers a profession as a control factor in the society (Winter, 1988).

Butler (1951) distinguished three corresponding phases in librarianship: awareness of scholarship and res ponsibility of the librarian as a bookman in the 1850s, preoccupation with technical issues in the 1870s, and self-consciousness, awareness of social concerns, and cultural environment in the 1920s. Butler's and his colleagues' contributions at the University of Chicago Graduate Library School led to the emergence of a philosophy of librarianship. Functionally, librarianship is defined as "that branch of learning which has to do with the recognition, collection, organization, preservation, and utiliz ation of graphic and printed records."21 And in the case of a university library, its primary function is "to secure, make available, and conserve the materials of research needed by members of the faculties and graduate students."22

Historically, librarianship is closely related to scholarship in its pursuit and control of knowledge records, requiring bibliographic training and skill to organize and service written records (Bay, 1941). Scholarship itself is a system of ideas, facts, theories, and opinions. True library scholarship integrates science and technology with humanistic perspectives relating to the individual patron and his social group (Butler, 1951). Today's focus in librarianship, however, is more on the process (research and education) than on cultural functions (philosophy of librarianship).

C. S. Thompson (1931) objected to the 'unrestrained' scientific and research orientation as weakening the traditional focus on reading. J. P. D anton (1934) pleaded for the philosophical viewpoint, arguing that science deals with acquisition of data, their description and explanation; while philosophy is interested in the aims, functions, purposes, and meaning of librarianship. Although all writers agreed on the social function of the library, there was no consensus on its specific duties or functions; some advocated a passive role, such as serving readers only when they asked for help, others wanted an aggressive approach. The lack of philosophy a ffected the sociological foundation of librarianship (Khurshid, 1976). J. Thompson (1977) defined the library profession in terms of his seventeen 'principles,' discussed in the previous chapter. They included library dependence on society, its unique monopoly in preservation and maintenance of free access to all knowledge; its educational role in adjusting library collections to cultural environments; and pragmatic management of libraries by professional librarians.

B. P. McCrun described the characteristics of librarianship in terms of its 'idols' of prejudice, error, and misunderstanding (McCrun, 1946). S. Rothstein added its ethos: values of reading, taste, intellectual freedom and professional skills (Rothstein, 1968). Kaser proposed an anthropocentric view of 'Bibliothecalhood.' As the library's stewards, librarians are responsible for preserving, organizing, and disseminating the humanistic message. "Unless we do our work well as librarians, we could bring about the destruction o f our society as the Mayan priesthood may have done in Yucatan."23

Harris criticizes the adaptation of pluralistic paradigms in librarianship, which portrays the profession "as apolitical servants of the 'people'. . . completely neutral on social, economic, and political questions -- a passive 'mirror' of societal interests and values." 24 This, according to Harris, leads to technically sophisticated but also trivial research in librarianship, research whic h "has dictated long and broad structured silences relative to the ways in which social, economic, and cultural power relations shape the nature and extent of library service in America." 25

In his own theory of library service in the United States, Harris focuses on librarianship as a consumer of culture, rather than a producer of its circulation: "Libraries are marginal institutions embedded in a hierarchically arranged set of institutions designated to produce and reproduce t he dominant effective culture in print form . . . with some like publishers and reviewers, empowered to create and produce cultural products, and others, like librarians, limited to the transmission and reproduction of the dominant effective culture." 26

In this view, library reality is determined by the political and economic powers outside the discipline, which "determine the nature and extent of the knowledge forms we acquire, preserve, and disseminate." 27 It also "challenges the 'apolitical' conception of the library . . . and strips the library of the ethical and political innocence attributed to it by the pluralistic social theorists." 28

3.4.4 Ethics of the Profession
In general, professional ethics stresses either traditional, often negative, restrictions imposed on a discipline, or idealistic viewpoints, advocating positive rights and freedoms to expand the discipline's activities. This dichotomy is related to two typ es and three kinds of professional autonomy.29 The two types of authority are (1) normative, based on shared values, and (2) structural, based on legal power of the organization. The three kinds of autonomy determining the values and principles of professional conduct are: (1) practical/political, (2) philosophical/intellectual, and (3) moral.

In the past, the normative authority of librarianship reflected that of its society; its structural authority was severely limited b y imposition of society's own values, affecting both the political and professional autonomy. Today, most library professional work is collegially controlled.

One of the themes of this book is the articulation of the library's philosophical and intellectual authority, which may in turn strengthen its moral authority for determining the bibliographic value of specific information.30

3.4.5 Reading
Promotion of reading is one of the most visible educational activ ities of librarianship. The impact of reading on an individual reader and its relationship to reading environment are the subject of the sociology and psychology of reading. The now well known questions 'who reads what, why, on what level of reading, and where does he or she get it ?' are the subjects of reading research. The major issues include motivation, use, function and values of reading. "The process of reading effects is not one-way transference, from books to readers, but . . . it entails a re-acti on, certain elements in the reader responding to certain elements in the reading to produce an 'effect'"31

It is important for librarians to know the kind of reading needed and how to facilitate it, by assisting in the process and by providing appropriate reading material. Each book is a specific interpretation of reality and the librarian's assistance in its selection is based on the aggregate understanding of book-reader relationships (MacLeish, 1972, 1976). Library leadership in promoting reading is based on a belief in readers' receptivity to the book's content, and their broad-mindedness (Haines, 1938).

Reading research in librarianship "reveals much about the basic nature of the library profession and the social, political, and methodological problems librarians face . . . for example [it] concerns the fundamental question of whether librarianship is (or should be) essentially a social science, an art, a craft, or a technique."32 In his exte nsive study of reading research in pre-1940 librarianship, S. Karetzky pointed to the significant relationship among the researchers' philosophy of librarianship, their use of research data, and their social environment. His research adds an intellectual and philosophical dimension to librarianship. According to Karetzky, the basic functions of reading are: (a) to learn about known reality (i.e., reading for information), or (b) to escape incompletely known reality (either as a metaphysical search for k nowledge, or as a recreational activity).

People vary considerably in what motivates them to read. Some read for aesthetic purposes, to appreciate somebody else's interpretation of reality, whether imaginative or empirical. Devotional reading is motivated by spiritual, emotional needs, while cultural reading aims at enhancement of one's status, or as a goal in itself (Mukherjee, 1966). So-called 'good reading' always reflects the personal needs and taste of the reader.

The level of re ading and the librarian's assistance to readers in their personal development through reading are determined by the relationship between the book's format and subject content, and the reader's interest and background.

Two metaphors concerning reading were used in 19th century library literature (Ross, 1987).
(1) The 'reading as a ladder' metaphor suggests that books can be objectively ranked on a scale of quality from low to high, and it is the duty of the reader to climb the reading ladder. This approach repudiated fiction and reading for pleasure as inferior to the reading of nonfiction, or for information.
(2) The 'reading as eating' metaphor shows that the real content of a book is a thing that can be swallowed and will have predictable effects on a reader.

The treatment of fiction in the 20th century suggests that the metaphors of 'reading as ladder and as eating' have prevailed until now. Some people feel that reading for information is nobler than reading for emotiona l experience. Yet it is the intellectual process in the use of the library by the patron, rather than the way individual books are read, that ought to be of primary concern to the librarian.

Both metaphors provided a rationale for expanding library policy: to provide assistance and access to collections as basic library functions, and to include intermediary service between the content of the book and the reader's needs. In the past, many writers commented on the importance to the library of re ading. Jefferson argued that reading provides for self-education, freedom, equality, and achievement. To Butler, civilized man writes books for two reasons: to express his feelings or to record information; and he reads works of others "for the emotional experience or to acquire information." 33

Bostwick, Putnay, and Richardson see librarians as agents of the book. MacLeish feels that the book is not merely a physical but also an intellectual object. It contains reports relative t o the mystery of existence and the reporters' interpretations of it, and it offers material for synthesis of universal life experiences, expressing reality beyond the self. The library provides access to such experiences (MacLeish, 1972). To Powell (1954), the good book is a 'teacher par excellence.'34

3.5 Information Science
Information science evolved from the earlier movement of documentalism. Shaw, Taube, and Shera, the three early proponents of the movement, agreed that a documentalist differed from a librarian in two ways, by providing greater intensity of search and by better subject knowledge (Mohrhardt, 1964). Basic questions asked by information scientists are: What is the information wanted for? What is the meaning that must be extracted from it? What knowledge is required for effective and competent action? These questions represent a major shift from the traditional focus on the generic book content to the more general concept of information as a struc ture of any text (Belkin, 1978).

Definitions of information and information science vary and are discussed in more detail later in this book. To illustrate their variety, here are some examples. > (a) On information.
The word 'information', standing for 'action of informing' has been in use since the 1380s; it was first interpreted as 'communicated knowledge' in the 1450s (Lancaster, 1992).

Cooney (1987) suggested four approaches to understanding the value of inform ation: as an intrinsic quality, as a cost, as an actual supply and demand for information, and as a function of utility served. In answering the question 'What should a science of information be?' Otten (1974) lists three levels of information: structural, analytical, and semantic. He considers the concept of information as a code, statistical data, or transfer of meaning, all related to matter, energy, and communication processes (Otten, 1974).

Debons sees information as (a) a process, (b) an al tered state, (c) a commodity, and (d) an environment of people, equipment, and procedures. Information bridges the above approaches by metascientific laws.35

Information is considered to be an essential component of human life (Curras, 1984). It is defined in terms of decision making, and it provides the bases for a metascience of information, informatology (Otten and Debons, 1970). Or, it is interpreted in terms of uncertainty involved in decision making (Whittemore and Yovit, 1973). Belkin and Robertson (1976) define information as a structure of any text that can change the recipient's perception. They consider text as a collection of signs purposefully structured by the sender. Farradane (1976) identifies information with the text itself, "i.e., as any representative or surrogate of knowledge or thought."36

Fox (1983) stresses the everyday meaning of information and advocates a linguistic approach. Dervin (1976) discusses information affecting the 'a verage' individual, while Wersig and Windel (1985) focus on information action. Buckland (1991) provides a threefold definition of information: as a process, as knowledge, or as a thing. Wersig and Nevelling (1975) believe that information science must be defined in relation to the information needs of people involved in social activities, either as a process of reducing uncertainty caused by communication data, or as data themselves, which are used in reduction of uncertainty. The subjective nature of info rmation was discussed by Popper, Dervin, Belkin, Ranganathan, Jason, Taylor, Cutter, Dewey, and Neill.

(b) On Information Science.
Information science is perceived as an interdisciplinary convergence of communication, instructional technology, and librarianship (Jackson, 1984), which, together with logic and philosophy, deals with relevance of information. It is a study of information production in any information system and it becomes an integral part of library education (Hayes, 1969). Information science is often defined as a study of the theoretical issues relating to the content, storage, retrieval, and transmission of information messages. Changing needs of science and business prompted changes in information functions, such as translation, abstraction, indexing, system design, and information-related language analysis. The expanding scope of information science is evident in the increased research of physical carriers, psychology of users, sociology of the environment, linguistic nature of recorded symbols, and statistical models of interpretation.

Pratt considers the collection, preservation, organization, and dissemination of records (his 'CPOD system'), as equally applicable to library and nonlibrary situations, and calls for more emphasis to be put on the information system's behavior (Pratt, 1982).

J. A .Pickup distinguishes between information technology and information science, suggesting a change of the name 'storage and retrieval' into 'science of informatio n use', and he stresses the importance of intellectual processing of information (Pickup, 1987). The trend now seems to be to interpret information science as a process rather than as a product, to focus on conceptual and economic values of information.

3.6 Changing Paradigms of the discipline.
The paradigms of library and information science can be delineated in terms of the sociological, philosophical, and scientific aspects of the discipline.

3.6.1 Sociological aspect s: Society and its expectations.
As an effect and not a cause of societal changes, librarianship is subjected to continuous modifications of its functions and purposes, with little if any control over them.

Development of libraries is also directly related to the level of the country's socioeconomic status; its dynamism depends on the librarians' reactions to societal changes and the way they address the conflict between the needs of individual patrons compared with those of the society . The social responsibilities of librarianship, in order for it to be effective, entail continuous dissemination of knowledge. The library therefore serves as an intellectual node for interdependence of the society's members.

The changing focus of library and information science, from an individual to a society, reflects changed focus in the society itself. The concept of the 'social library', introduced by Benjamin Franklin in the 18th century was based on society's belief in self-education of its patrons. Jefferson called for equality and achievement through reading. The 19th century introduced the concept of libraries for moral betterment. Twentieth century librarianship aims at the provision of needed information to different clients, with the public library concentrating on free access through outreach programs.

In the early 1920s the discipline witnessed expansion of qualitative objectives. During the Depression in the United States, librarians scrutinized their own services in terms of their usefulness. During World War II and its aftermath, the focus was on efficiency of operations, followed by a period of concern about library effectiveness. In the early 1980s the library was criticized for the predominance of its socially oriented programs.

3.6.2 Philosophical aspects: Information environment and its nature.
Khurshid (1976) maintained that the functions and practices of librarians are not governed by any accepted principle or philosophy.37 He implied that philosophy may identify these basic principles by developing philosophy-based models.

By organizing records, we in fact organize the thought processes of the society. The alphabet as a product of ideograms reflects the evolution from ideas expressed by one person, as an artist drawing a picture in a cave, to community-communicated ideas, expressed in common language.

Khurshid notes that Ranganathan in his five library laws emphasized two philosophical concepts : of a book as a means for documentation of ideas, and of library growth as a reflection of expanding knowledge. Shera (1962) restated Ranganathan's laws of library service in terms of maximizing the utility of graphic records for the benefit of the society. Danton (1934) criticized Ranganathan's five laws as not providing open-ended inquiry into the validity of functions and activities; he claimed that library philosophy should start with the philosophy of a society and its role in democracy. Reece (1936) interpreted librarianship in terms of books' influence on the history of civilization through the library's service as a center for expressing economic, social, civil, cultural, vocational, and recreational preferences of the time. Both Danton and Reece added the sixth basic law to Ranganathan's list, the library's role as an educational, scientific, and cultural institution.38

3.6.3 Technical Aspects: Inventions and their Adaptations
From its beginning, librarianship wa s identified with the technology of handling reading material. At first this technology was a purely experimental craft. Later, following the inventions in other fields, the technology was adapted to the library operations, allowing for expanding the basic function of book care-taking.

The impact of technology on library operations can be grouped in a number of distinctive issues.

a. Types of material
In the use of clay tablets, librarians concentrated on the techniques of storage. Use of papyrus improved retrieval, codex facilitated easy access, paper simplified duplication, and the computer significantly improved the technique of manipulating information. The transition from paper to electronics, like the preceding transactions from papyrus to paper, will be a long process. Paper alone was used for five hundred years. Since the 1960s it has been used simultaneously with the electronic medium (e.g., Index Medicus is in both printed and electronic formats). Exclusively electroni c formats have had some library applications as reference tools. There is also some total conversion from paper to the electronic image in information retrieval processes, although paper is still used for facsimile transmissions.

b. Printing and bibliographic control
The new technology in publishing was followed by improved indexing of library collections. One of the first bibliographies, compiled in 1545 by Conrad Gesner, Bibliotheca Universalis, listed some 12,000 items in Gre ek, Latin, and Hebrew. Since then, however, the constantly expanding number of publications has made an all-inclusive bibliography impossible. The final unsuccessful attempt to compile a universal bibliography was made in 1895 by Paul Otlet and Henry La Fontaine, who founded the International Institute of Bibliography to compile a complete bibliography of all intellectual literature. Today, individual libraries and library networks compile their own bibliographies and national libraries provided current, cumulative coverage of their collections. Bibliographic control was significantly strengthened by the introduction of the Machine Readable Catalog, which required considerable cooperation in standardizing cataloging entries.

c. Printing and organization of collections
New technology also significantly influenced modern cataloging processes. Until the invention of print, records were arranged by subject.39 In 1605 one of the first printed catalogs was available in t he Bodleian Library. In 1650 the first dictionary catalog interfiled author and subject. In 18th century brief entries were used, with the first national code of cataloging introduced in 1791. In 1815, the dictionary catalog was used in the United States as an index. Cutter's Rules of Cataloging appeared in 1876. The card catalog was the only alternative to the printed catalog until the beginning of the 20th century. The modern system of indexing, classification, and cataloging by author and subject were i n full use by the 19th century, significantly speeding up the introduction of automation by interrelating the three approaches.

d. Printing and access
Open access to collections already existed in antiquity, although it was restricted to a privileged few. The need for free access grew in the Middle Ages. At first, it was available through catalogs only, with no direct access to the shelves. Crude resource sharing was practiced in the form of interlibrary lending procedures for copying a nd reading. Between the 9th and 12th centuries, interlibrary loan transactions were indicated by annotated location in the catalogs. The first known union catalog was compiled in the second half of the 13th century. It covered the collections of 183 monasteries in Great Britain. Interlibrary activities were considerably reduced in the 15th century due to the invention of print.

In the 20th century, open shelf access was initiated in American libraries, and interlibrary loan activities were signi ficantly expanded by creation of a variety of on- and off-line networks. Beginning with the 1970s, informal cooperative and resource sharing arrangements become formalized, through the use of the computer, in a highly structured system of local libraries40 "Today . . . the concept of network has shifted to the point where "network" is now equated with "connectedness." Computer networks are distributed rather than centralized systems and are based on linkages with peers, not top-down c ontrol . . . conceptually the terms "network" and "hierarchy" are . . . considered to be on opposite ends of the organizational continuum."41

Ladner wonders if direct and almost instantaneous access to computer-based information by end-users, bypassing such intermediaries as librarians, will make the interlibrary loan, and with it special libraries, obsolete in a near future.

e. Computers
At first, library computer services were passive, limited to static d ata sources. Improved efficiency of database services and information stored in a 'knowledge base' enabled librarians to anticipate users' interests, thus offering not only interactive but also proactive services. At first, data-gathering by computers related to 'how we do things'; later it provided information to 'what, and why we do it.'

Natural language interface permitted human operators to communicate with the computer using human-like language, while visual recognition becomes important to robotics designers.

Interest in artificial intelligence (AI) focused on expert systems, a computer program that solves problems by following sets of rules and reaches conclusions similar to those made by human experts. Artificial intelligence consists of: (1) a database (facts), (2) a knowledge base (e.g., set of rules for comparison and interpretation of data); and (3) an inference engine, applying the knowledge to act on the situation-specific facts that are fed into the machine. Elec tronic publications will eventually augment conventional print-on-paper sources. Now, however,it is still essentially an analog of existing printed materials, differing only in its physical (i.e., electronic) format, its different mode of retrieving organized data, and its method of accessing through computerized telecommunication networks.

The changing technology has the greatest impact on the formats providing information, rather than on 'entertaining' or 'inspiring' publications, although they may eventually be reproduced on videotapes and videodisks.

The implications of all the technical changes for libraries are obviously great, although not yet fully recognized. Routine record-keeping activities were automated first, yet manipulation of the machine-readable records was handled exactly the same way as before. It was the on-line access to resources in libraries that significantly modified the concept of the traditional library (Lancaster, 1982).

f. Research
I n the 1980s information research focused on relevance, accuracy, and accessibility of information. General Systems Theory was involved in the search for common structures in different fields. In information retrieval activities centered on studying various characteristics of information transfer. The 1990s began with the increased interest in the application of developments in cognitive psychology and linguistics to library and information environment. The last decade of the 20th century marks a shif t of librarians' primary focus from static information, retained in books, to a much more dynamic information, in part captured by periodical publications. The library retains its traditional archival responsibility, with increased attention paid to direct access to current information, whatever its format: "As the new millennium approaches, librarians no longer serve the book that serve the clients. Questions rule in the age of answers. Linked by its commitment to client information needs instead of knowle dge of specific tools, the library profession becomes an information profession defined by its ends rather than its means."42

3.7 Prophecies of Changes
Foskett (1985) traces the forecasting of a paperless society to Licklider's statement made in 1965, that books are less than satisfactory for storage, retrieval, or display of information and should give way to 'procognitive systems' based on computers. Lancaster predicted that the impact of the currently fast changing technology on knowledge-based economy and the emergence of paperless communications will significantly affect the newly emerging role of librarians in a disappearing library (Lancaster, 1978, 1982).

In his 'philosophical forecast' for 1984, D. J. De Solla Price predicted among other changes, free distribution of major scientific journals (Foskett, 1986). Lancaster (1982) followed with a claim that books would soon be obsolete.

Apostle and Raymond forecast changes in the profession's self -perception. Since "the profession's most important function is the acquisition, storage, organization, and retrieval of information," 43 they argue that "information has become a key component of postindustrial society" and that "library science and information science are becoming essentially the same activity.",44 Therefore "libraries will begin to atrophy due to their inability to survive competition for more efficient, electronically-based providers of information, a nd librarians will have either to transform themselves into information professionals or find themselves unemployed."45

Various authors listed several arguments in support of and against these conclusions. They overlooked, however, the simple fact that the profession will most probably absorb the changes not by breaking up, but by expanding its services to all formats of information. Its paradigm will change from library science to a library information science that embraces the philosophical underpinning of a metalibrary (or some other model with a catchy name). The predictions listed above reflect a "confusion between form and content or method and purpose . . . content or purpose is primary, and should not become dominated by, or subordinated to, method or form."46

3.8 Critique of the Discipline
The criticism sampled here is of historical value because it points out problems faced by librarians at the time it was made. While some of it has been already answered by the changes made, other may still be relevant to the problems faced by the discipline.

(a) Powell (1954) was critical of a lack of interest in books among librarians. The non reading librarians' argument was that their predecessors' preoccupation with book collecting neglected managerial aspects of their profession. Powell's answer was a question: Who is more important in librarianship, a bookman or an administrator? Either extreme, he maintained, is bad. The need i s for fewer rules and no boss-librarian mentality. The ideal library leader would be a bookman by choice, education, and experience. He or she would consider the book itself as a powerful teacher, making the librarian responsible for providing good administrative leadership, by fighting censorship and by being a good public servant. He quoted John Durie (1650): "The proper charge of the library keeper is to keep the public stock of learning, which is in books and manuscripts; to increase it, and to propos e it to others in the way which may be most useful unto all . . . "47

(b) Lindsay (1977) maintained that in relationships between a library and its social context, libraries are not sure about the social importance of their function. The irreconcilable contradictions in their practice were created by a lack of theory related to library practice.

The basic assumption in the theories proposed thus far is that the library is a social institution, with a philosophy varying with different political or social systems. Lindsay referred to my statement that main library objectives are justified by their closeness to other societal ideals of democracy and self-realization of its citizens. Other writers, such as Joeckel, Wellard, Kolitsch, McColvin, James Thompson, and Foskett made similar claims. However, according to Lindsay, none of these statements defined democracy, or self-improvement, mystifying the philosophy by using words that no one understands, and justifying in direct uses of power on behalf of others. All writers subscribed to the conservative tenet that 'better is more of the same'; no one questioned the foundations of these social beliefs. Yet Lindsay believes that the democratic content of our society is decreasing and production and consumption of knowledge by itself might not be satisfactory to save democracy. The library performs the roles different from the one intended by writers criticized by him.48

Furthermore, intelle ctual rigor is absent in present library philosophy, and the gap between 19th century human liberalism and 20th century revolutionary socialism is growing. There is an irreconcilable contradiction, Lindsay concluded, in defining the individual in terms of social relations, profit, money, or the like (Lindsay, 1977).

(c) McCorison (1984) believed that libraries and books are in low esteem because our intellectual and moral order is in shambles. Universities mirror relativistic chaos, with managers rather than educators administering these institutions. The technocrats are in power and curricula are designed to catch the trendiest students and scholars.
Libraries are made financially independent without independent mission or status. Distinctions among books as carriers of knowledge, objects of commerce, or esthetic expressions are observed. Research collections are not tied to the curriculum, hence only private, independent research libraries are able to build specialized collections th at give them identity and purpose. Collections must be built around an idea, which has a substance and is not duplicated somewhere else.

(d) Berry objected to the dropping of the term 'library' in the names of library schools. This trend, he maintained, has a disastrous effect by downgrading the profession. Librarians are not managers, specialists, or scientists. The library has a well-established social image as an agency responsible for organizing and servicing resources for information, knowle dge and recreation (Berry, 1987).

(e) E. Mason criticized the state of U.S. librarianship in the late 1960s. His review was written at a time of campus revolt and during a period of transition from financial extravagance into a period of scarcity. It was also a period of leadership changes. Many outstanding librarians who emerged from library schools of the 1930s, as successors of the great public librarians of the late 19th century, were approaching retirement.

Mason's criticism, altho ugh obsolete in its reference to specific issues of the 1960s, may contain a valuable lesson in general. It can be divided into three parts.
(1) The organizational structure of American librarianship was criticized for lacking management science techniques above the level of unit cost and system analysis related to computerization. Libraries did not use program budgeting techniques. Linear organizational structure was too slow, inaccurate, and ineffective and should have been replaced by more in dependent decentralization.
(2) Research collections lacked the delineation of their scope. New programs were built in brief periods without sufficient resources, with shallow coverage of specialized areas as a result. Library experts were not sufficiently knowledgeable about their subject. The professional master degree was not satisfactory preparation for the job. Nonbook material was heavily used in school libraries, replacing the librarian with the A-V specialist. Instructions in the use of a cademic libraries were relegated to individual department's classroom orientations only (E. Mason, 1971).
(3) Premature Computerization. Computers were introduced in libraries too early, for reasons, and because they offered 'free' time, with little cost analysis. Their popularity in the period of Sputnik led to disregard for their costs, obscuring many other machine and machine-manual alternatives. They were introduced into libraries in the early sixties, when the largest problem was operational, whereas at the time of the essay, in the late sixties, the major problem was largely financial. Consequently, the misplacement of limited resources resulted in diminished collections and reduced services, at the time when both were most needed.

Automation was brought to university campuses by physical scientists, mathematicians, and engineers for its computational facilities, introducing a new campus ecology, polluted by technologists and plagued by politics, and financial crises exacerbated by the need for expensive programming. In the library, computer response time was confused with the response time of computer processing. On-line circulation became very expensive, acquisition very slow, and labor cost (salaries of programmers) significantly increased.

The decision to automate was not based on managerial principles: costs were not evaluated or projected. Yet a computerized system is virtually irreversible. If it would have been more economical in the 1980s, Mason argued, then it should not have been introduced in libraries until then (E. Mason, 1971a).

(f) Ten years later, Robert M. Mason acknowledged the value of computers. Computer 'learning' consists of the ability to recognize a problem that it has solved before and the capability to select relevant facts. Human knowledge includes, in addition to facts, the meaning and the significance of these facts. People can use common sense by utilizing computers' nonstandard logic to change previous conclusions in light of additional information (R.M. Mason, 1985).

(g) Schrader, in discussing the nature of the discipline, commented on library anthropomorphism. It is a logical fallacy to treat social institutions as living organisms, e.g., to describe information as verbal transactions between persons, neurons in the brain, sensors in animals, chemicals in cells, or physical changes among inanimate objects. As Fairthorne (1969) noted, collision between two stones is not a transfer of information. Mechanistic reductionism impl ies that a machine can do everything a human does. This overlooks, Schrader concludes, such concepts as family, ethnic group, culture, or educational systems. In man-machine communication the concept of personified machine is confused with mechanized persons.49

(h) Similar criticism of automation was made in other countries. For example, Line maintained "that we must not automate what we do not understand,"50 since "we cannot evaluate the adequacy of a system solely from the use made of it, for this use is itself conditioned by the system."51 After all, readers will not use a system that they do not expect to be useful to them. "We see deficiencies of our libraries, but we do not know what useful purposes are hidden by these same deficiencies. And if we automate a system whose virtues and faults we do not understand" -- Line reminds us -- "we are in a great danger of automating the superficial aspects only and destroying the real virtues."52

Following Donald Urquhart's example, Line also focused on the demystification of library and information science. He defines it as "a process of stripping to the bare essentials"53 the hope for developing 'right' structure, 'correct' cataloging rules, or maintaining 'faith' in the power of numbers by counting the citations, or automating everything.

(i) Lofgren was concerned that post-industrialism would exert a negative influence on librarianship by sh ifting library focus from the traditional, cultural approach to one based on a business or corporate-market approach. The new emphasis is on "self-image of librarian as a professional with technical proficiency, selling services to whoever is able to demand and pay for these, [and on] belonging to the technico-professional elite that has such a crucial position in the post industrial image of the future."54 It is a shift from the idealism of "the nineteenth century social and political phi losophy of liberalism with its emphasis on the role and rights of the individual" 55 to a post-idealism of current pragmatism. Notwithstanding a very substantial impact of new technology on library operations, the anticipated revolution, Lofgren notes, has not yet materialized, but its popular imagery continues to attract some writers.

3.9 Summary and Conclusions
At each milestone of library history, different options were available to the discipline. The choices made i nfluenced the future of the discipline, changing its approach from the antiquarian storekeeper to librarianship as a major social agency.

Library heritage is long and rich. It stretches from secular collections of manuscripts in antiquity, emergence of religious and vernacular libraries in the Middle Ages, the Renaissance's private collections, new library organization during the Reformation, a scientific explosion in Enlightenment, national and public libraries in the 19th century, and an electr onic revolution in our own lifetime. Technology is finally making it possible to integrate the multitudes of individual accomplishments into a unified discipline.

Today the discipline faces a crisis of self-identity. It is divided in its focus between (a) the traditional preoccupation with service and the new interest in the theoretical analyses of it, and (b) the pragmatic function of assisting in patrons' search for needed records and the scholarly pursuit of research into the generic concept of i nformation itself. In the next chapter the discipline searches for the unifying solution by redefining itself, in hope to finding some common ground for all its fragmented viewpoints.

Metalibrarianship
Table of Contents
Tables and Diagrams
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Historical Milesones in Librarianship
C hapter 3: Changing Paradigms of Library Information Science (LIS)
Chapter 4: The Issues of Library Information Science Self-Consciousness

1. Winger, H. (October 1961). "Aspects of Librarianship: A Trace Work of History." Library Quarterly , p. 333

2. The distinction among Library, Librarianship, and Library Science as subdivisions of the discipline a re accomplished by capitalizing the terms standing for each unit. The distinction between the popular use of 'information' meaning many different phenomena, and its narrow, technical definition as one of the phases in knowledge transfer, is more difficult. To avoid confusion and to restrain from inventing a new term, I use 'informations' (plural) as a shortcut for its technical interpretation.

3. Nitecki, J. Z. (July, 1964). "Public Interest and the Theory of Librarianship." College & Research Libraries, 25(4), p. 275.

4. Farrington, B. (1944). Greek Science. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books, p. 14.

5. Ibid., p. 13.

6. Ibid., p. 15.

7. Shera, J. H. (1957). "Pattern, Structure and Conceptualiza- tion in Classification." In International Study Conference on Classification for Information Retrieval ; Proceedings of the Conference . Dorking, England. London: ASLIB, p. 115.

8. Cassisorus, Institutions divinarum et saecularium lit- terarum, quoted after Hessel, 1955, p. 13.

9. See Hessel, 1955, p. 80, passim.

10. McCorison, M. A. (Second Quarter 1984). "Bibliography and Libraries at the Brink: A Jeremiad.: The Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America , p. 136.

11. The changing attitude toward traditional cataloging and classification was illustrated by the popularity of the 'speed cataloging' (Nitecki, 1969), 'simplified classification' (Nitecki, 1969) and introduction of title subdivision in the card catalog at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (Nitecki, 1968, Nitecki, 1970). Title arrangement was later fully utilized in computerized catalogs.

12. Graziano, E. E. (1955). The Philosophy of Hegel as Basis for the Dewey Decimal Classification Schedule. Unpublished Master of Art Thesis. The University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, pp. 1-2.

13. Ibid., p. 52.

14. Ward, D. V. (1987). "Metaphysical Issues in Classification Theory." In Information : The Transformation of Society. Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, Boston, October 19 87. Learned Information, Medford, N.J, p. 255.

15. Broadfield, A. (1946) The Philosophy of Classification . London:Grafton, p. 27.

16. Also published in this year was Dewey's Classification Scheme, and Cutter Rules for a Printed Dictionary Catalog . A divided catalog in New York, and a telegraph for internal communication in British Museum, were displayed; also the American Library Journal published, and a regional union list of periodicals was begun in Baltimore.

17. Quoted after Reith, 1984.

18. Winter, M. F. (1988). The Culture and Control of Expertise ; Toward a Sociological Understanding of Librarianship. New York: Greenwood Press. (Contributions in Librarianship and Information Science), p. 86.

19. The term 'librarianship' is also used loosely as a des- cription o f the discipline, or its science. As already men tioned, I capitalize the term 'librarianship' when it refers to the profession of Librarianship.

20. For an interesting profile of a nineteenth-century British librarian, scholar, and encyclopedist, see McCrimmon, 1989.

21. Danton, J. P. (October, 1934). "Plea for a Philosophy of Librarianship: Philosophia vero omnium mater artium." Library Quarterly, 4, pp.528-29, 551.

22. Danton, J. P. (June 1941). "University Librarianship; Notes on Its Philosophy." College & Research Libraries , 2(3), p. 201.

23. Kaser, D. (July 1971). "The Ptolemaic Theory of Librarianship." Oklahoma Librarian , p. 13.

24. Harris, Michael H. (1986) State, Class, and Cultural Reproduction: Toward a Theory of Library Service in the United States. Advances in Librarianship, vol. 1 4, p. 215.

25. Ibid., p. 221.

26. Ibid., p. 242.

27. Ibid., p. 245.

28. Ibid., p. 241.

29. Types refer to common characteristics shared by classes of individuals; kinds refer to the classes of entities with common characteristics differentiating them from other classes.

30. The library code of ethics is formulated in terms of (a) practi tioner-client relations; (b) relations with colleagues, and (c) employer-employee relations. The rights and obliga tions are stated in (1) the ALA's Library Bill of Rights, 1939; (2) The Statement of the Committee on Intellectual Freedom, 1940; (3) The Intellectual Freedom manual, 1974; and (4) the Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom and Intellectual Freedom Primer, 1977. See also ALA (1930, 1975).

31. Burke, R. A. (1953). Culture and C ommunication Through the Ages . (The book began as a joint endeavor with Pierce But- ler), p. 46-e.

32. Karetzky, S. (1982). Reading Research and Librarianship ; A History and Analysis . Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press. Contributions in Librarianship and Information Science, Number 36, p.xvii.

33. Butler, P. (1943). "Survey of the Reference Field." In P. Butler (ed.), The Reference Fun ction of the Library (pp. 1-15). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Papers presented before the Library Institute at the University of Chicago, June 29 to July 10, 1942, p.4.

34. See also Tague, J. (June 1979). "Information Science in Graduate Library Programs." Canadian Library Journal , 36(3), p. 89.

35. For a discussion of different reading processes and the librarian's role in meeting patrons' reading needs, see Nitecki, J. Z. (August 1986). "Creative Reading; Of Letter Thoughts and Words." Canadian Library Journal , 43(4), 229-233.

36. Debons, A. (1974). Information Science ; Search for identity . New York: Marcel Dekker. Proceedings of the 1972 NATO Advanced Study Institute in Information Science held at Seven Springs, Champion, Pennsylvania, August 17-20,1972, p. 462.

37. Khurshid, A. (January 1976). Intell ectual Foundations of Library Education. International Library Review , 8, p. 4.

38. Ibid., p. 11-13.

39. In the 16th century Konrad Gesner (1548) arranged his compilation alphabetically by author. Benedictine monks (1560) had 5 catalogs: by author, classed shelf list, alphabetical subject index, index to reserves and letter codes with first letter indicating the size, second the color, third the subject o f the book.

40. Ladner, Sharyn J. (1992) "Resource Sharing by Sci-tech and Business libraries: Informal Networking and the Role of Professional Associations." Library and Information Science Research Electronic Journal (E-mail from Editors@Kentvm), December 15, 1992, 1428 lines.

41. Ibid.

42. Quint, B. (April, 1992). "The Last Librarian: End of a Mil lennium. " The Canadia n Journal of Information Science / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'information , 17(1), p. 32.

43. Apostle, R. and Raymond Boris. (December 1986). "Librar- ianship and the Information Paradigm." Canadian Library Journal , 43(6), p.377.

44. Ibid., p. 382.

45. Ibid.

46. Foskett, D. J. (April 1985). "A Note on Libraries and the 'Paperless society'." International Forum on Information and Documentation , 10(2), (Letters Column), p. 47.

47. Powell, L. C. (1954). "A Bookman's Credo." Quoted from B. McCrimmon (Edit.), American Library Philosophy ; An Anthology . (pp. 161-164). Hamden, Connecticut: The Shoe String Press, 1975, p. 164.

48. In his essay, Lindsay (1977) also discussed views of Lenin on the library role in societ y, Nyere on education, Marx on German ideology, Miliband on the state and capitalism, Poulantzas on class and politics, Mills on sociology, and Caudwell on aesthetics.

49. Schrader, A. M. (1983). Toward a Theory of Library and Information Science . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, pt. 1, pp. 99-110.

50. Line, M. B. (1968). "The Functions of the Universit y Library." In W. L. Saunders (ed.), University and Research Library . (pp. 148-158). Oxford,England: Pergamon Press, p. 148.

51. Ibid., p. 150.

52. Ibid., p. 151.

53. Line, M. B. "Demystification in Librarianship and Information Science)." (1975). In Line Maurice Barr (eds.), Essays on Information and Libraries . Festschrift for Donald Urquhart . London and Hamden, Conn.: Clive Bingley (London) and Linnet Books (Hamden), p. 110.

54. Lofgren, H. (November, 1985). Post-Industrialism and Librarianship: A Critique. The Australian Library Journal, 34(4), p. 28.

55. Ibid.