Megan W. - Libraries

At the beginning of his speech, Bollier quotes an inscription- "What spectacle can be more edifying or more seasonable, than that of Liberty & Learning, each leaning on the other for their mutual and surest support?"

He then argues that "the linkages between Learning and Liberty have never been more fragile, or more important than today."

This link between learning and liberty illustrates the importance of libraries in a democratic society beautifully. Democracy is based on personal freedoms and liberties- while learning is based on access to knowledge (which libraries provide!). So, our liberty depends on our access to knowledge, and our access to knowledge depends upon the liberties granted to us. If our freedom to access knowledge decreases, so will our knowledge. If our access to knowledge decreases, so will our freedoms.

I really like the "knowledge as water" metaphor that he uses. He explains that libraries help information "flow" in a way that makes it a common resource, accessible by all.

Libraries provide us with that access to knowledge- and we are given the freedoms to access any knowledge that we'd like (that the libraries provide). Libraries ensure that we are able to acquire knowledge that we would like to acquire. This is essential in a democratic society.

The internet presents an entirely different kind of access to knowledge, but an access to knowledge nonetheless. Libraries and the internet share the function of providing access to knowledge. Many people seem to think that the internet can "replace" libraries. However, the internet is subject to so many copyright threats. People are fighting to control and filter the information that is on the internet. So, if they win, and we also don't have any libraries- then how will access information? Where will the cultural commons be "held" and distributed to us? Libraries ensure that the cultural commons is preserved and taken care of. The internet is rapidly changing- which can be a good thing, but with so many people fighting for control of it- who will ensure that our cultural commons are is taken care of? This is where libraries come in. It isn't as if the internet and libraries have to be conflicting sources of information. They can give and take from each other as needed. Bollier mentions several online libraries and digital archives. If libraries embrace the advantages of the internet, they will likely be able to thrive in these uncertain times.

Vaidhyanathan's idea of "anarchy in the library" is referring to the governing of knowledge BY the PEOPLE. For some reason, we seem afraid of anarchy with regards to knowledge (the internet for example). I think he is kind of pointing out that maybe anarchy should rule- in the libraries- in our knowledge. It shouldn't be "owned" or "regulated" by a central power. He argues that the tension between anarchy and oligarchy has always been present, and always will be. His hope is that people will actually TALK about it and come to some happy medium. He recognizes the limits and dangers of anarchy as a form of government- but argues that oligarchy is not the solution. People tend to "buy into" one of these extremes. Many are afraid of one or both extremes. Why can't there be a middle ground? He wants us to find that middle ground, especially with regards to knowledge. If we aren't ok with anarchy in knowledge, we don't need to go to the other extreme, we can find a middle ground.