The Debates Over Guelph's Carnegie Library

Synopsis

In a previous post, "Are Public Libraries Still Important?", I discussed the historical development of public libraries, the public library in Guelph, and, suggested that while the role of libraries is changing, Guelph still needs one. In this one, I will deal with the creation of Guelph's Carnegie Library, it's destruction, and, what lessons we need to learn from it.

&&&&

Andrew Carnegie,
from US National Portrait Gallery,
c/o Wiki Commons

The first thing to understand is that the name "Carnegie" in the title "Carnegie Library" refers to a historical person, Andrew Carnegie. He was a Scottish Immigrant to the USA who rose from obscurity to being the richest man in the world. He did this through a combination of hard work, risk-taking, being able to cultivate important friendships who helped with what would today be called "insider trading", taking advantage of a government position during the American Civil War, being an early adopter of a disruptive innovation (the Bessemer Converter, which was a quantum leap in the production of cheap steel), and, by assembling the first "vertically-integrated" steel company that brought coal mining, coke production, steel foundries, and, heavy manufacturing (e.g. steel rails) all into one business.

Carnegie believed that the rich had a moral obligation to use their money to benefit society. To this end, he wrote extensively on this subject, which became known as "The Gospel of Wealth". He suggested that the really wealthy had an obligation to spend most of their money on good works for the community, live modest lives themselves, and, if a person insisted on trying to amass inter-generational wealth, the state should intervene and impose very high estate taxes to prevent the creation of an "inheritor class". Moreover, he believed that wealthy individuals should personally administer their wealth in a way that didn't just succor the poor, but helped them work their way out of poverty altogether. Probably the best way to understand him is to think of parallels between Carnegie as a 19th century Bill Gates or Warren Buffet, and his library fund as being similar to the Gates Foundation's attempts to control malaria or bring public education to the Third World.

Carnegie believed that access to a free library as a youth was tremendously important to his later life, so he set up a foundation that donated funds to communities all over the world to create public libraries. At first, the only stipulation was that local government agreed to fund the on-going maintenance of the library once it had been built. But shortly thereafter, as a result of some bad designs being OK'd by communities, he instituted guidelines that standardized building features to a certain extent.

&&&&

Before I get into the specific conversation in Guelph regarding building the Carnegie library, I want to give people some context. In the outside world, the Empire---including Canadian volunteers---was just finishing off a war in Southern Africa (the Boer War.)  There was an international terror campaign being waged not by ISIS, but by anarchists. And there were concerns about American soldiers water-boarding insurgents resisting their occupation of the Philippines.

American Soldiers Torturing Philippine Citizen
US Army Photo, c/o Wiki Commons

Closer to home a terrorist bomb was found in the canal being built to channel water from Niagara Falls to a electrical generation facility. As well, someone was poisoning sheep in Elora by spreading Paris Green on their pasturage. A big debate was taking place in Guelph about whether or not sanitary sewers should be installed. Local doctors gave testimony to Council suggesting that these were essential to preventing outbreaks of diphtheria and typhoid. In addition, Council also had to deal with other important issues, such as managing a telephone system, natural gas (as opposed to manufactured coal gas), and, the connection of railways. (This was just before the creation of the Ontario Railway and Municipal Board---today's OMB---which was tasked with helping municipalities deal with these complex technical issues.) In addition, there was a great deal of "back and forth" by Council over a proposed glue factory in the city because of concerns about the smell it would produce. As a result of all these contentious, difficult issues, it was not unknown for Council meetings to continue until midnight.

&&&&

In 1901 the Public Library Committee applied to the Carnegie Foundation for funds to build a public library building in Guelph. The grant was approved, and Guelph was given $24,000. To put this amount in context, in 1905 the total budget of City Council came to $138,000. And using an on-line money calculator provided by the Bank of Canada, I was able to convert $24,000 1914 dollars (the earliest date allowed) to $520,000 today. To put things into another context, the current city budget's projected gross expenditures is $484 million. 24,000 is 17% of 138,000. And 17% of today's gross budget is $82.28 million dollars. Obviously cities like Guelph were very happy indeed to be given a library!

"The report of the Special committee on the Free Library recommended the granting of a site and further recommending the granting of Nelson crescent as the site was adopted." (Guelph Mercury, April 25, 1902)

Council then held a special meeting where it adopted the recommendations of the Free Library committee and formally accepted the Carnegie donation.

Oddly enough, one city Councillor, John J. Drew, was so upset about a special meeting being held to accept the Carnegie money that he resigned his seat in protest and sued the city. Believe it or not, the suit was settled in less than one month and only cost the city $12 ( $260 in today's dollars.) Obviously the legal system functioned very differently in 1902 than it does in 2017. It isn't clear from the Mercury why Drew was so upset, other than he was standing on the principle that there should be no special meetings to decide important issues.

Later on, in 1905 there was a letter to the Editor by a George Norrish that mentioned that some people in Guelph were complaining that the Carnegie library was being paid for with "blood money". He doesn't go into detail, but I can only assume that they were referring to things like the Johnston Flood, the Homestead Strike, and, Carnegie's association with Henry Clay Frick. To understand why anyone would take issue with such a generous donation, readers should consider these different parts of Andrew Carnegie's business life.

The Johnston Flood was an catastrophe that was created when a consortium of business magnates---including Frick and Carnegie---bought an old artificial lake in Pennsylvania. It had been originally built to provide flow for a state canal system, but the investors purchased it to form a hunting and fishing club. They put in several "improvements", including an access road on the top of the dam, a screen on the spillway to prevent fish from escaping downstream, and, removed an elaborate set of pipes that were used to regulate water levels downstream. After the dam's failure, consulting engineers reported that they believed that all of these measures weakened it and contributed to the catastrophe. On May 31, 1889---after a period of exceptionally heavy rain---the dam failed and sent a wall of water and debris cascading downstream. It killed 2,209 people.

Just one part of the Johnstown Flood Catastrophe
Contemporary Lithograph, c/o Wiki Commons

To understand the Homestead Strike, it's important to understand that unions were a very big part of working life in the late 19th and early 20th century. In the period when the Carnegie library was built in Guelph, the Mercury is filled with stories about strikes and labour settlements between unions and management. Henry Clay Frick---who took over day-to-day control of operations once Carnegie retired to his life of philanthropy---was ideologically and adamantly opposed to unions. It is also important to understand the revolution that Andrew Carnegie brought to the production of steel.

Iron production had traditionally been a somewhat skilled job, which gave the workers in foundries significant leverage when it came to negotiating contracts. Carnegie's new technology and vertical integration of steel making "dumbed the job down". This meant that most of the jobs became just manual labour. Individual workers were easily replaced and this dramatically reduced their ability to negotiate good contracts with management. When prices went down, wages were cut substantially too. And because of the "disruptive technology" that Carnegie adopted, the steel prices did go down dramatically. In the Homestead Iron Works the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers (AA) attempted to organize and support a union and fought against management's attempts to hire men through "Yellow Dog Contracts"---which forced workers to agree that they gave up the right to join a union if they worked for the company. This "push and pull" escalated over several years to the point where armed battles broke out between the union members and the local community on the one hand, and, forces of hired thugs  (Pinkerton detectives) on the other.  At one point this included a fight where the union used a twenty-pounder artillery piece against a barge filled with strike breakers who attempted an amphibious landing at an occupied factory! People were killed and wounded, and the Governor eventually called out the state militia to intervene.

The 18th Regiment Arrives, Harper's 1892
Copyright Expired, c/o Wiki Commons

Because of things like the the Johnstown flood and the Homestead strike, Henry Clay Frick was absolutely loathed by a significant percentage of the population. And because Frick was associated with and managed his businesses, Andrew Carnegie suffered from guilt by association. Indeed, Frick was so loathed that he suffered from an assassination attempt by a leading light in the American Anarchist movement, Alexander Berkman. Once modern people understand the context, it becomes easy to see why some folks would see a Carnegie library as being paid for with "blood money".

Berkman Attempts to Kill Frick
Harper's, Expired Copyright, c/o Wiki Commons

&&&&

At this point the record goes dark. The month of July, 1905 is totally missing from the Mercury microfilms. This means that whatever story there was about the grand opening is gone forever. The earliest mention that I could find was an August 16 story that mentions the first public lecture given in the new facility. A Mr. W. H. P. Anderson was brought in by the Clerk's and Salesmen's Association. Three hundred people attended.

Fast forward to 1964. The big stories on the front page revolve around civil rights in the USA---lots of pictures of black people rioting, ominous stories about civil rights workers disappearing in the South, the odd speech by Martin Luther King Jr.. LBJ is pushing through the Civil Rights Act, and the Republican Party has nominated Barry Goldwater for the next presidential election (and thereby scaring the bejesus out of Canadian editorial cartoonists.) Canada is committed to another military fracas in a small, far-away country---this time it's Cyprus instead of South Africa. 

Terrorism is still an issue, but now it isn't the international anarchist movement, instead it's Quebec nationalists---who are raiding militia armories and setting off bombs that destroy property and kill the odd person who gets in the way, and, the Ku Klux Klan blowing up churches and murdering civil rights workers. Prime Minister Mike Pearson and John Defenbaker were involved in a seemingly never-ending debate about adopting a new national flag.  (Almost as a side-line, the Pearson government was also creating the Medical Care Act and the Canadian Pension Plan.)  

Judging from the letters to the editor, it is easy to believe that the flag and water fluoridation were the two most important issues for Guelph residents. But there were other issues for people to write about. For example: 

I believe that a Mrs. Hogan in her recent letter has exposed an uneasiness that a number of people feel about the annual Kiwannas Minstrel Show---   ---we are passing through a period of considerable racial tension not all of which is confided to the nation to the South. Is it wise or just to continue to perpetrate a stereotype of the American negro personality which is no longer valid, if indeed it ever was?

signed, Robert C. Kail, April 22, 1964 Mercury letter

Here's a picture of local Guelph service club "minstrel show" from the 1960s
Photo reproduced with the permission of the owner. 

&&&&

With regard to the public library, a story in the January 28th, 1964 edition of the Mercury stated that a D. J. Matthews, who was chairman of the Library Board, reported that the Board was not in favour of demolishing the old Carnegie library unless it was "structurally necessary". He also said that land had been purchased next to the existing library for $52,000 for the new building. City Council then decided to set aside $500,000 for building the structure. Using the Bank of Canada's groovy inflation calculator, this translates into $414,000 to purchase the land, and, about $4 million for the building in today's dollars. The total operating budget for the city of Guelph in 1964 was $7.58 million, or $60.4 million in today's dollars. The cost of the library translates to 7% of the entire Guelph budget. To put that into perspective, the 2015 tax levy in Guelph (that is, what Council collected in taxes---but not in fees or transfers from other levels of government---it is hard to read a city budget because of all such complexities) was $208 million. And 7% of that would be $14.6 million. It is obvious that building a new library was a very substantial investment for the city in 1964---and there was no deep-pocketed steel magnate around to pony up.

Even with this assurance from the Library Board, several people were concerned about the future of the library because they could see what had happened to a lot of other architecturally significant buildings in the Downtown, although other voices were in favour of it's demolition.

"Guelph does its best to destroy every trace of its early architecture, and there seem to be very few voices raised to stop this tragic deed", (letter to Mercury by Barclay Holmes, March 2/64.)

 ...

"The Guelph Public Library, now the subject of so many letters to the editor, is not old as Guelph buildings go. Our city hall is 100 years old, our court house 120;  many homes are 100 years old. The library is not build in an architectural style distinctive to Guelph.---
---There would be no harm in preserving the library building, if efficient use could be made of it;  but the library board has made a thorough study of this aspect of the question, and has had expert advice on it. To preserve the building for its own sake would be ridiculous." (letter to Mercury by Marion D. Cameron, March 11/64.)

(Actually, contrary to what Mr. Cameron says, there seemed have been a lot more letters to the Mercury concerning fluoridation of water and the flag than there were about keeping the Carnegie library.)

...

"Sir:
At a recent meeting of the Wellington County Historical Research Society, we endorsed a resolution protesting against the "pending destruction" of the old Library building.
As it is one of the oldest and most artistic structures existing, we would wish to have it remain as is. Hoping the result will be in favour of the historical group.
Yours sincerely,
Mrs H. M. Warren,
Wellington County Historical Research Society" (letter to Mercury, March 12/64) 

...

"---As nearly as I can classify it, it seems to be an ordinary piece of early Carnegie pseudo-classical to which a silo was affixed. In its turn, the silo or grain elevator has a low Byzantine  dome capped with tar. The building does not enshrine any production of lost or vanishing skills. Instead, it represents a rather elementary exercise in materials that are richer and better in our own day. Elementary, I say, because we can now employ these building materials in a more pleasing and useful fashion. The point has not been emphasized so afar by your correspondents that the "stone" blocks of the building are an early form of concrete aggregate overlain by a sand wash:  it's ornamental elements are of precast concrete or of pressed metal. If it is necessary to preserve this type of building, why not encourage one of the 2,800 other communities having Carnegie libraries to embalm theirs? I, for one, would not travel far to inspect one of these dreary, obsolete structures.
---At present, our library costs the average Guelph citizen about $1.96/year---the approximate equivalent of nine quarts of milk, of two hockey games, or of a dozen beers per year."

(Mercury letter by John Oughton, March 26/64) 

Oughton goes on to state the the population of Guelph in 1964 was between 30,000 and 60,000 and it was near the bottom of support per capita of comparable cities. For example, Sarnia spent $3.77/person/year, whereas Guelph only spent $1.96. (Obviously milk and beer were a LOT cheaper back then!)  In 2017 dollars, $1.96 translate to $15.62---which helps us put things into perspective. In 2015 the Library received $8.37 million from the city (there are other sources, but the lion's share comes from Guelph Council.)  Since Guelph's population is about 130,000 people, this translates to something like $64 per person today---a four-fold increase in support for Guelph, but only a doubling for Sarnia.

&&&&

John Oughton's letter is quite interesting. He makes a couple of strong statements that can be looked at in turn.

First of all, he suggests that the Carnegie library is not worth preserving because it is made of concrete. I've heard surprise from friends who assumed that the old library was made of Guelph limestone like so many other buildings. But I think we need to be careful not to be biased against ugly old concrete. Consider the following picture:

Copyleft, MarkusMark, c/o Wiki Commons

This looks like another ugly old building made out of concrete. It also has an attached "silo". Let's take a look at the front:

Copyleft, Martin Olsson, c/o Wiki Commons

The front looks better, but it still kinda ratty. How about an inside shot? 

Copyleft, Wknight94, c/o Wiki Commons

Of course, the above is the Pantheon of Rome. Most people don't know this, but this 2,000 year old building---one of the very few ancient buildings that still stands intact---is made of concrete. I think that we can discard any idea that a building is not worth preserving just because it is made of concrete instead of stone. 

&&&&

It is obviously true that the old building was simply too small and old-fashioned to continue to be Guelph's main library. But did that mean it needed to be torn down? Couldn't it have been "embalmed"---to use Oughton's loaded verb? It turns out that the province of Ontario has a website devoted to "embalmed" Carnegie libraries so the tourist can peruse their funeral grandeur---something like visiting the mummy collection at the ROM. Carnegie funded one hundred and eleven libraries in Ontario, Sixty-one are still in use as libraries. Thirty-four have been "re-purposed" and are in use for other, non-library uses. Only sixteen---including Guelph's---were torn down.

&&&&

On June 3rd, 1964 the death sentence was announced under the caption "Retention of Library Building Not Advised":

Much to the surprise of many Guelphites, the Toronto architects who have studied the library situation in the royal City in the preparation of plans for a new public library, point out that the walls of the present library building along with the moldings are "artificial or imitation stone"---
---the exterior artificial stone facing of the building shows signs of deterioration and that it is almost impossible to repair artificial stone which is spalling and cracking---

 The report, prepared by James A. Murray, goes on to point out that the activities of the public library require a space of 27,850 square feet whereas the old Carnegie building is only 6,800 square feet in size. Moreover, the front entrance requires people navigate 17 steps to enter. (It is nice to see someone thinking about these sorts of issues all the way back in 1964!) The children's section is in the basement, which is damp---which would be very difficult and expensive to fix.  The story goes on to say: "The proposed new library, he says, would replace one with artificial stone with one natural stone---".

Later on, there was a story on June 16th under the title "Opposition Is Voiced to Library Demolition" with the subtitle of "Board to Get Final Plans Construction of Building".

Guelph library board was authorized by city council in committee Monday to proceed with arrangements to obtain final plans and specificiations for the construction of a new library, also for the demolition of the present building.

Aldermen H.F Farmer, C.V. Robinson, and, F. W. Dixon were opposed to the demolition, but the resolution passed.

&&&&

I did a Google search on the name "James A. Murray" and found a couple very interesting links. It turns out that Murray was something of leading light in the Canadian architectural community. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any public domain pictures of his work, so I can't include any in this article, but if you click on his name in this paragraph, you will see blog posts that show several buildings he designed. It is easy to see that he had a hand in building the present downtown library.

Murray certainly liked flat roofs and boxes. This shouldn't be surprising. It was a time when most institutions liked to pay for buildings that looked like bunkers. Take a look at the University of Guelph library or the Co-Operators building, both of which were built at the same time as the library. This was the time when "Brutalism" reigned supreme in architecture.

This was the architectural school that gave up any attempt at all to appeal to traditional building aesthetics and instead put up purely functional buildings without any attempt at decoration at all. Generally, they were square blocks with flat roofs and were made of cast concrete or monotonous brickwork. The term "brutalism" was invented by a British architectural critic who coined the term to describe an influential Swedish home named the "Villa Goth" that was built in 1950. The name was widely adopted.

Villa Goth, the building that inspired the term "Brutalism"
Copyleft Sebastian F, c/o the Wiki Commons

Institutions---like large corporations, governments, universities, etc---adored Brutalism because it allowed them to be "hip" and "with it" while at the same time allowing them to totally dispense with any aesthetic sense and totally concentrate on controlling costs and maximizing utility. In contrast, most citizens loath the buildings.

All human beings exist embedded in a culture. This allows us to feel a sense of continuity no matter where we go in it. This cultural context is what allows people to have a feel for various things. An Arab Mosque, Daoist Temple, and European Cathedral all have design features that allow people to instantly know what culture they inhabit even though each particular element of the building is different in one way or another from every other building of that type. This is what philosophers call a "family resemblance" and what architects call a "pattern language".

Some of these design features are the result of having to deal with specific environmental conditions. Northern countries---like in Canada and Sweden---have to deal with the build-up of snow in the winter, which is why peaked roofs have been part of our traditions instead of flat ones. Other features are brought in to remind people of historical association. I posted a picture of the Pantheon earlier on in this article, as you can see below the Carnegie library incorporated elements that continued the same design tradition. 

The old Carnegie library: front pillars with a dome in the back. Just like the Pantheon
Photograph courtesy of Guelph Public Library Archives
Sometime in the 1950s, Item C6-0-0-0-0-1231 -

The problem with Brutalism is that it doesn't fit into our culture, it usually doesn't fit into the way the rest of the street looks, and, very often it additionally doesn't fit into our climate. But at the time that the Carnegie library was built public buildings were consciously designed to hearken back the old Temples and Palaces of old Europe. The idea was that the public sphere was above the commercial or personal. It demanded more from an architect. But in the sixties people thought that the old was stultifying and needed to be purged. Ordinary people bye-and-large didn't know where things were going, so they tended to go along with what the experts were saying. And, of course, the people paying the bills were over-joyed to have found an architectural school that designed buildings that were cheaper to build.

Front of current downtown branch, Guelph Public Library,
Photograph appears courtesy of the Guelph Public Library Archives,
late 1960s, Item C6-0-0-0-0-1230 - 

But there were people in 1964 who were upset about having the old Carnegie library demolished. In contrast, I suspect that almost no one would shed a tear about the demise of the present one. What's the difference? I'd say that it's because the present population has had to live through so much radical and accelerating change that they are heartily sick of buildings that are "new" and "innovative", or even "utilitarian". They want something that fits into the landscape and reminds them of their culture. And they want to refer to things like ancient Greek temples, not strip malls.

When James A. Murray recommended that the old Carnegie building be demolished he talked about its size, the number of front steps, the damp basement, etc. But these are non sequiturs. They are reasons to no longer use the existing building as the main library, not to tear it down. The building could have been kept as a library annex. Or it could have been re-purposed as a lecture hall or something else. If it needed it, I find it exceptionally hard to believe that it couldn't have been repaired. If the Pantheon has lasted 2,000 years, I suspect that Guelph's Carnegie library could have lasted at least another 100. What I suspect actually happened was that the library committee hired a modern architectural firm that simply didn't like the old ways of doing things and wanted to follow the latest fad. And Guelph simply followed the line of least resistance and did what they were told.  

&&&&

When I started researching this story I had a vague idea about using it as a way to draw parallels to the current arguments you see about the built environment in Guelph. But the laborious process of working through a few years of the old Guelph Mercury teased out other issues, ones that I think are pretty important and rarely discussed.

A minor story about an Alderman resigning his position to protest the process where the Carnegie library was built, and, a letter to the editor by someone complaining about other people saying the building was being paid for with "blood money", opened up an entire world that has disappeared without a trace in the popular consciousness. The Johnstown Flood and the Homestead strike were as big as 9/11 and Black Lives Matter in their day. This got me thinking about other issues. Other little items jumped out at me too. A brief mention of American officers on trial for war crimes got me doing some research into the Philippines occupation. And that led to me finding out that waterboarding was being done by the US long before the "war on terror". Indeed, a note about the bomb being placed in a construction site in Niagara Falls plus the attack on Henry Clay Frick led me to learning about the international terrorist movement by Anarchists.  And further research on destroying the Carnegie library opened my eyes to the scale of the threat caused by the FLQ in 1964. Can you imagine what the reaction would be today if a group was breaking into militia armories to steal weapons and explosives?

"plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose": Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr:  “The more it changes, the more it’s the same thing.”

People often repeat this phrase, but rarely do I think people remember to put today's issues into a proper historical context. We get all flustered and upset about things, but many of them are not much more than background noise to anyone who isn't directly affected. Ask yourself "Do I know anyone who has actually been killed by a terrorist?", then ask again "Do I know anyone who has been killed in a car accident or has been affected by a psychiatric illness?"  The obvious answer will come to everyone, and then---what should be---the obvious question arises "why does society devote enormous resources to this trivial problem while fundamentally ignoring these two tremendously important ones?" (Don't get me started on climate change---.)  I'd suggest that part of the problem is that almost no one ever tries to put these issues into their proper context. (Hence the need for for this on-line magazine.)

&&&&

The second issue that struck me was that the fundamental issue with tearing down the Carnegie library wasn't replacing it, per se, but rather that people were upset with what replaced it. People don't like brutalism, and it's still why they oppose new buildings again and again. Unfortunately, the government and big business are so in love with it, that people have been conditioned to fight tooth and nail against all new buildings because they know that when push comes to shove, the architectural design that will be chosen will be a big, nasty-looking, flat-roofed building block. The professional architects will come up with some groovy language about how it fits into some sort of aesthetic framework---but we all know that they built it this way because it's the cheapest way to to do it, and, the government is going to let them do it that way. Developers complain about the Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY) phenomenon, but I'd argue that a lot of the time it's really No More Brutalism!

To be fair to the planning department, they have been trained by the OMB to accept this sort of development simply because they know that if they did try to force developers to build differently, they would just get dragged through an expensive OMB hearing and lose anyway. One can only hope that the recent announcement by the Liberal government that they are going to radically overhaul the OMB will finally allow planning departments to force architects to end their love affair with brutalism.

&&&&

This article was only possible because we have a library. That is where I found the microfilms of the Guelph Mercury to do the primary research. It also shows how important it is to have local news sources. Without the work of the unnamed reporters who ground out stories day after day, there would be no record at all. And I would never have known that John J. Drew resigned his seat over accepting the Carnegie money, that there were folks complaining over the "blood money", or, that a relatively famous Toronto architect, James A. Murray, was involved in the decision to tear down the old building.

This brings me to my final point. Guelph needs to support local news production.  Guelph Today and the Guelph Mercury Tribune simply do not count as real news sources. We need a lot more. That's why I support Adam Donaldson's Guelph Politico through a monthly Patreon pledge. It's also why I am asking people who read the Guelph Back-Grounder to consider doing the same thing. We need to support the pioneers of alternative journalism if we are ever going to get the industry off the ground.

The Back-Grounder isn't put out regularly, so another way to support it is to just put a little money in the tip jar when you think a particular story was really good.

Also, if you are a small business or non-profit that would like to advertise in the Back-Grounder, I can accommodate that too. Email me at "thecloudwalkingowl@gmail.com" for more information.

Why You Should Support "The Guelph Back-Grounder"

Two recent stories in what I call the "lame-stream media" really clarify why it is that I've started publishing "The Guelph Back-Grounder". Since it's been a long time since I've published a story---and I've only had one reader actually give me some money for reading the website---I thought I'd send off a quick "advertorial" to explain exactly why I think it is important for readers to support it.

&&&&

The first story comes from the National Post about suicides at the University of Guelph. It mentions that there have been four students who killed themselves since last September and members of the admin have been walking around residence "checking in" to see how people are faring. The idea is that there has been a rash of suicides and the school needs to do something about them. But nowhere in the story does the reporter make any effort to find out if there really has been an extra-ordinary number of suicides on campus.

If you look at stats Canada you will find that there is an average suicide rate amongst per 100,000 males age 20-24 of .00016. There are also 22,648 students at the U. of Guelph (full, part-time, undergraduate, graduate), which means that four suicides in one year is .00018.

Complexities to consider. Suicides among males are higher than females. And also among ages 20-24 as opposed to 15-19. But, there are no numbers I could easily find for university students as opposed to non-university students, so this is bound to be a non-representative sample because many students are away from family and friends for the first time in their life. They are also subject to stresses that many other young adults in this cohort are not subjected to.

So the number of four suicides seems a little higher than the average but well within the range. That is because the average that I've quoted (from a stats Canada website) is a mathematical abstraction. Simply through random distribution, there will be higher numbers and lower ones too.  This is especially true when such a small change in the size of the group (that is, if there were 3 or 5, instead of 4) would have been a very significant change in the final outcome (ie: the ".00018" number.) And since "clumping" is part of random distribution, I would suggest, therefore, that there has not been an epidemic of suicides at the U. of Guelph, but rather just what would be expected.

I realise that this is an emotionally-charged issue, which might be part of why no official has "pushed back" on this story. But public policy should be driven by numbers and dispassionate analysis instead of emotions. If we don't do that, we end up doing things that were never intended.

With that in mind, I think it's important to understand that every time the university puts money into increased counselling and support services for students they have to pull it out of other parts of the budget. There is a well-recognised phenomenon in university administration that there has been a huge increase in resources being pulled from academic and physical resources and redirected to these support services. (People often hide this fact by saying that the problem is the growth of "middle management". This might be part of the problem, but I would suggest that this is just an attempt to evade the fact that a lot of the people are remedial teachers, therapists, people who help students with disabilities, etc---that no one wants to be seen as opposing. In addition, adding in all these support services makes navigating the university environment more complex, which means that more middle managers are necessary to make sense of the Byzantine bureaucracy.) This has been subsidized by replacing tenured professors with poorly paid sessional lecturers, deferring building maintenance, replacing full-time unionized maintenance staff with contract employees, and, increasing tuition fees. In effect, every attempt to make the lives of students a little easier has been done by making the lives of lecturers and support staff worse, letting buildings fall apart, lowering the quality of education, and, making university less accessible for poor students. This is what is called "the opportunity cost", and it's something that is never mentioned in lame-stream media stories about things like university suicides.

&&&&

The second story I wanted to talk about comes from the CBC and it has the headline "1 child or youth injured by gunfire nearly every day in Ontario, pediatricians find". The person who casually hears about this might think "Wow!  An epidemic." But if you carefully read the story you will find out that the age group includes everyone aged from newborn to twenty-four. Most people wouldn't consider anyone age twenty to twenty-four as being anything other than an adult. Moreover, it turns out that the study included as a "fire-arm" bb, pellet, and, air soft guns as well as regular fire arms. Again, most people don't think of a daisy bb-gun when they read "gunfire".

Stats Canada says that there are 2.22 million people in Ontario, age 0-14. There isn't a similar break down of age 14 to 24, but let's assume that there are similar birth/immigration rates for both cohorts. That means that we can divide 2.22 million by 14 and get the birth/immigration rate per year, or .159 million per year. Multiply that by ten, and you get the number of people aged 15 to 24, or 1.59 million. Add those together, and you 3.81 million Ontarions aged 0 to 24. Divide this number by the number of cases mentioned in the article, 355, and you get one injury per 10,730 "youths".

When I was a student in high school I didn't know anyone who got killed or injured by a firearm. (Although, I did have a pellet from a pellet gun bounce off a tree and hit me in the cheek---it stung.) I did, however, know about six guys who got killed in drunken car accidents. (It was the 1970s, a time very, very different from now.) Well, lets compare the two. I have a statistics Canada page open that says that 51,487 people aged 0-24 in Canada were injured or killed in car accidents in 2010. I looked at the population for Canada, and it appears (from some calculation) that Ontario had 39% of the total Canadian population in 2012. So if we multiply 51,487 by 39%, we get a figure of 20,080 fatalities and injuries in Ontario for one year. Lets be conservative and ignore the increase in population between 2012 and 2016, that means we have one injury by car accident per 190 "youths". This begins to fit into my personal experience as a teen. (I'm not saying I knew 960 "youths", but the fatality rate in rural Canada during the 1970s would have been much larger than today.  Like I said, a very different time.)

When we explain exactly what is going on beyond the headline, and, compare the numbers to those from auto accidents, it turns out that there really doesn't seem to be much of a problem here after all.

&&&&

I used to write a weekly column in the old paper "Mercury". That's when I started doing the sort of fact checking that I have done above. I found that 15 minutes with an Almanac or other standard reference text was often enough to show how totally ridiculous many news stories really were.  This was the basis of many of my columns. They were plenty popular, but I stopped after three years because the "Merc" editors never offered to pay me anything for them. Indeed, I had to beg for a "free" subscription. Eventually, I realized that I was just taking the bread out of the mouth of some professional journalist, and I didn't want to do that---especially when the likes of Ken Thompson and Conrad Black were making fortunes squeezing profit out of the paper.

Another reason I quit was because I started to absolutely loath the lame-stream press. After getting into the habit of "deconstructing" these sorts of stories I started to realize that the people controlling the media usually don't give a damn about the public good or the truth. What they are trying to do is sell advertising and make money, period. And to do that, you have to be emotional and sensational instead of honest and contextual. The two stories I referred to above are pretty standard fair in that they are designed to whip the public into a frenzy so people will share stories on social media, which will generate advertising revenue. When copy is written to be as sensational as possible for these reasons, the name for it is "clickbait". In this case, both stories were designed to crank up people's biological anxiety over the safety and well-being of children.



This sort of "journalism" is incredibly damaging to the public interest because it is worse than keeping the public uninformed----it is actually filling their heads with misinformation that confuses them about what is or is not important when they are making up their minds about public policy issues.

Since the Trump campaign there has been a lot of talk about "fake news". Originally, this came from a Vice Media story about how a group of teenagers in Macedonia had managed to make a lot of money by creating false stories that supported the Trump campaign, post them on fake news sites, and, convince gullible right-wingers to share them extensively in the "Trumposphere". The result was a lot of money being raised by Google Ad Sense, which had advertising on these stories.

But "fake news" is more than just teens in Macedonian playing dumb Republicans. That's at the farthest end of a continuum that starts with reporters who don't have enough time to do any back ground research to be able to put any given story in a context, and, editors who tell them to "sex up" a story with lots of emotion so the story can go the rounds in social media. And all of this is dangerous to a democracy because it is ultimately a form of very effective propaganda. This isn't propaganda for any government faction, it's propaganda for the least rational, most emotional part of the human mind. It's an institutional bias towards outrage, poor judgement, lynch mobs, and, the misuse of scarce public resources. 

&&&&

After my initial feeble attempts at being a journalist were over, I went through a "dark time" where I basically hated all professional reporters because I thought that the majority of them were actually destroying our democratic system by spreading dangerous lies about the world around them. I've since become a bit more mellow and now think that the real problem is that most of them are being chased around from story to story by editors who don't allow them the time to think about what they are doing----let alone do any background research.

&&&&

I've just "knocked around" a bit on the Internet to come up with the deconstruction that I've done on these two stories (even by doing this, however, it has taken me a few hours to write this story.) But to provide a context for an issue often requires a great deal more work than that. The last story that I wrote about the Ontario Municipal Board, for example, involved a very careful read of a fairly complex, technical analysis of the board by an independent scholar. This took an hour or two careful reading every day for about a month---but most of this isn't obvious when you read the finished article. Almost all professional reporters simply don't have time to do this sort of back ground research. Instead, they get assigned a story, make a few phone calls of people that they know will give them a good "quote", and write a "he said"/"she said" story. Then it's time to write the next one. As a result, you will get lots of stories where people complain bitterly about not being able to find an affordable apartment---but nothing about how for decades an obscure tribunal has blocked attempt after attempt to build apartment buildings in Ontario cities and as a result we have a huge shortage of rental housing.

The story I'm working on now involves a discussion of the old Carnegie library in Guelph with an attempt to draw parallels to the current debate over building a new main branch. This too is a lot of work. I've spent hours and hours already reading microfilms of rotten, hard-to-read, copies of the old "Evening Mercury". There are no indexes, which means I have to look at every single front page in order to not miss the very rare story that is relevant.  What is really maddening is that much is missing---front pages are gone or chopped to pieces. Months and months of the paper are simply missing too. But I have still found some interesting information and a lot of great context that describes what Guelph was like when the Carnegie library was built and replaced. This is really important if anyone is going to come to an informed opinion about the current debate over replacing the current library. But this is exactly the sort of work that no reporter at "Guelph Today" or "Mercury/Tribune" will ever do. They simply don't have the time. And I certainly don't expect Adam Donaldson at "Guelph Politico" to do it either---I don't understand where he gets all the energy to do what he already does.

&&&&

I like putting out "The Guelph Back-Grounder", I think it serves a useful purpose. But it is a lot of work. And this isn't supposed to be a charity. I'm trying to run this as a business, and a business needs revenue to keep going. I have managed to cut my costs down to the bone, but it still generates them. Authors don't want to give out review copies of books anymore, so if I review a book, I have to buy it. People won't take you seriously if you don't look "serious", so I have to generate a bare minimum of that sort of thing. I just spent $20 on business cards. I use "Blogger" because it is free, but I'm sure lots of people who look at the website are saying "Why doesn't he use a more professional-looking website?" Money. I can't just pull images off the internet because that would infringe on copyright and be stealing from artists, and sometimes I just cannot find a public domain image that works, so I have to buy an image from Shutter Stock:  more money.

I have an OK job, but I also have dependents, so any extra money I can make is really appreciated. More to the point, the public has to realize that you can't expect to get good journalism if you refuse to pay for it. I have Ad Sense adverts on my site, but they only make money for general, "click bait", style stories. Those kids in Macedonia will never get involved in a Canadian election because the entirety of Canada is too small to make real money off Ad Sense---so forget about local Guelph news. I've had adverts on my other website for years, and in a good month day I will make something like five cents off it. How does this work for Google? Well Google only pays in $100 increments, which means that it has had over $50 of my money sitting in an account---which it can use to fund its ventures---for about ten years. Since there are hundreds of thousands of bloggers in the same boat, you can see where Ad Sense makes Sense.  ;-)

If people want local news, they are going to have to pay for it. And if they want good local news, they are going to have to pay for that too. If they don't, the free market will give them "click bait" and what happens when a small number of reporters are being chased around from one "he/said, she/said" story to another. If people won't pay Adam Donaldson and myself to provide good news for Guelph, then no new people are going to come along and do the same thing when we eventually burn out, move on, or, just die in the traces.

&&&&

After the old paper "Merc" died there was a lot of "boo hoo, what are we going to do?" Most of that seems to have disappeared and people have adapted to the "new normal". Well, if ever there was a case of "the frog in the pot", news coverage in this city is it. I can remember the old, locally-owned Mercury. It had reporters who actually did research and sometimes even provided context. Then it got bought out by the chains. And there were ten horrible years when it changed hands every year. Each time, there were fewer faces in the news room. Context and investigation ended altogether. Then it stopped hiring local reporters and just brought in people from out-of-town who'd been downsized out of another paper in the chain. These people didn't know anything at all about the history of Guelph and didn't know who were "in the know" on any given story. The quality of even "he/said, she/said" stories fell through the floor. The editors knew circulation was dropping, so they told people to "sex up" stories. As a result, editorial policy seemed to become "stir the pot" and "get people upset". This certainly didn't help circulation, but it made ordinary voters more outraged over trivial matters. Even so, when the paper "Merc" disappeared, the on-line replacements of "Guelph Today" and the "Merc/Tribune" came along, they were much worse.

The only way this decline is going to end is if people start supporting alternative media. And in the case of "The Guelph Back-Grounder" that means three things:

• Subscribe to Patreon with micro payments. Even a dollar a month will make a difference.
• Make a one-time donation through the tip jar. Again, even a dollar will help.
• Advertise your business or community group directly through the Back-Grounder. It has a local readership that is a specific demographic that is community-focused and progressive. If that fits your business or charity profile, contact me ( thecloudwalkingowl@gmail.com .) Rates are reasonable because readership is still relatively low, and, this form of advertising goes straight into the blog format---so it is immune to ad blockers.  

Even if you think that my stories are awful and someone better should be doing this, you should support me. If I can't make any money doing this, no one else is going to try to do the same thing and try to out-compete me. And the number of people who are lunatic enough to put the time and effort I'm putting into this thing "on spec" are vanishingly small. If "the fool who rushes in where angels fear to tread" can't make any money off a venture, no angel is ever going to try to do it in the future. I'm what you've got, so "use it or lose it".

Bill Hulet

Are Public Libraries Still Important?

Synopsis

Libraries have a long history, but public libraries only stretch back to the late 19th century. They came about because the industrial revolution created a need for a new class of scientifically-trained workers. This new class of skilled employees were trained at charitably-funded "Mechanics Institutes", which also tended to include lending libraries. Eventually, these private institutions were taken over by municipal government and run like a public utility. This article argues that a similar demand currently exists to train people in "hands on" skills needed in the emerging "post-industrial" or "information" economy. Moreover, public libraries also serve the added purpose of saving local history. They also help lower income people look for employment and navigate government bureaucracy---both of which are primarily web-based. Finally, libraries serve as a publicly-accessible "third place" which fosters a sense of community.

&&&&

It's been about a year since the latest conversation at City Hall about putting a new public library in what is now the downtown Baker Street parking lot. That scheme was stopped cold by the decision of the provincial government to not fund a downtown campus of Conestoga College, which would have anchored the proposed Library/YMCA/College/University proposal. Since people have been arguing the need for a new downtown library for a very long time, I think that readers might be interested in a real investigation of why we have public libraries, whether we still need them, and, if we do, whether or not we need a new one in downtown Guelph.

&&&&

Why Do We Have Public Libraries? 

Libraries have existed almost as long as the written word. They existed in the ancient world, probably the most famous of which was the Library of Alexandria. This was an adjunct to the Musaeum of Alexandria which was a royally-sponsored institute of learning---similar to a university---which existed in the Ptolemaic Egypt. (This was the dynasty of Greek rulers who inherited that particular part of the empire established by Alexander the Great.)

Speculative Drawing of Alexandrian Library by O. Von Corven
Public Domain, Wiki-Commons 

Primarily, the Alexandrian Library existed as a "prestige" enterprise that helped advertise the power and glory of the Ptolemaic dynasty. Other libraries existed between the time of the Ptolemies and the modern era, but because books were so expensive, they tended to be rare and restricted to religious institutions like monasteries. With the rise of modern printing technology, modern "lending libraries" were created as something that the merely wealthy could access through subscription. Eventually literacy became more common and printing cheaper yet, and industrialists started supporting something called "Mechanics Institutes" for literate working class people. 

Mechanics Institutes came about through the Industrial Revolution when new technology created a need for an entirely new class of skilled trades people that could not be created through the traditional apprenticeship system. Primarily, these people were what we would call "engineers" who needed to have an education in mathematical analysis and the theoretical properties of materials that couldn't be learned from "hands on" training. Wealthy industrialists saw the need for these new "scientifically-skilled" workers, so they set up informal institutions where intelligent people could be taught these new methods. In addition, these organizations also had lending libraries so people could hone their language skills as well as learn calculus, chemistry, and, other important, practical skills.

Manchester Mechanics Institute Building, 1825
Public Domain Image, Wiki-Commons

Guelph's first lending library was located in a back room behind a store in 1832, and a formal "Farmer's and Mechanic's Institute"---with a lending library---was created in 1850.  Public lending libraries came about because of the need to raise the education level of the general public to be able to adapt to a changing workplace. 

Eventually, the Mechanic's Institutes lending libraries became seen as such an important public good that there was pressure to support them as part of the community infrastructure---just like roads, water mains, sewers, police and fire departments, schools, and so on. To that end, Great Britain passed a "Public Libraries Act" in 1850 that allowed local governments to create and fund lending libraries as a public "utility".  Ontario followed suit in 1882. Guelph Council immediately took advantage of its new powers, and established the Guelph Free Public Library in 1883 by taking over the Farmer's and Mechanic's Institute library and running it for them. In fact, Guelph created a public library in the same year as the much-larger Toronto. In effect, Guelph has been on the fore-front of public libraries from the very beginning of such things.  

Guelph administered this old Mechanic's Institute library for 20 years, but in 1901 the Chairman of the Guelph Library Board wrote to the Carnegie Foundation asking for a grant to build a Carnegie library in the town. This was formally approved in 1902, but due to various local delays, it was not open until 1905, in total the new building cost $24,000. ($4,000 was due to local delays---is this the earliest example of "the Guelph Factor"?)  In today's dollars, this is the equivalent of $640,000, which would have been---and was seen as---an astronomical amount of money for Guelph.

Photo by Charles L. Nelles -  Library and Archives Canada 

The Carnegie library lasted until 1964, when it was demolished to make room for the more modern building that we have today. (I will discuss this more in a future post.)

&&&&

What Are the Modern Equivalent of Mechanic's Institutes?

If public libraries first came about because emerging industries needed a new class of educated workers, the question should be raised "Do we still need them?" After all, we now have Universities and Colleges to teach technical subjects. And doesn't the Internet allow people to access technical information that people used to get out of books and magazines? Isn't the Back-Grounder itself an example of why libraries are obsolete?

To answer this question, I think that we need to be very careful framing the question. If we ask "Do we need public repositories of paper books and magazines?", we might be able to answer "Yes, we do. But the demand is decreasing very slightly." But if we ask "Do we need a public space where people can do self-directed learning in order to adapt to a changing world?", I think the answer would be "Yes, we desperately need it." Here are links to three different articles that talk about this point in some depth using research from Britain, the USA, and, Australia.

&&&&

Consider the following photo:

The Guelph Public Library 3-D printer---note the little objects
between the keyboard and screen.
Photo by Bill Hulet

That is a three-dimensional (3-D) printer. This technology allows people design an object using Computer Assisted Design (CAD) software, which then can be "printed" into an actual object using the machine on the left. The particular one that the Library has for public use can only print the sort of little toys that are on display with it. (Even this machine can be useful---a friend of mine used it to create a part for a vintage motorcycle he is restoring.) But learning how to use it will help people gain the basic knowledge and skills necessary to move onto larger, more practical types of machines.

To give readers an idea of how useful a 3-D printer can be, consider the following applications.  I have deformed feet and have to wear special orthopedic devices to be able to walk. Right now, this involves having my feet cast in plaster, then molds of my feet are made, which are then sent off to a fabrication lab, where an individual creates the devices by hand---a process that takes weeks to do. With a 3-D printer, my feet could be scanned, the orthodics designed with a CAD program, the software downloaded on a thumb drive, and, I could take it to a local "print shop" to be printed off the same day. Dentures, artificial limbs, and, many other devices can also be made this way. Parts for appliances can also be created this way---instead of sending off to China and waiting months for something to arrive. And, of course, since there is almost no real cost to machine set-up or part storage, with widespread 3-D printing no expensive, complicated machine will need be scrapped because one part broke and there is no longer any way to get a new one. All you would have to do is download the software onto a thumb drive from website, take it to a print shop, and, get it printed.

This technology is not limited to the use of plastics. Through the use of laser sintering technology, metal items can also be printed using 3-D methods.

There are also machines that will print ceramics---and much more exotic materials such as living human tissues! Think a little about 3-D printing and you will realize that this new technology will create as big a revolution in the economy as the steam engine did in the 19th century. And, I would argue, when that revolution comes it will require hordes of people with a wide variety of skill levels---from inventors, through entrepreneurs and machine operators, to people with enough basic knowledge to do customer service---to integrate the new technology into the economy. 

&&&&

I've focused on 3-D Printing so I could go into some detail to make my point---and because the Guelph Public Library actually has a printer for public use. What I wanted to emphasize is the continuity of purpose between the original "Guelph Farmer's and Mechanic's Institute" and the current Public Library.  Public libraries still serve that useful purpose of offering a venue where an engaged member of the public can self-educate herself in emerging new technologies. 

Truth be told, there are other things that people use the library for that are so common that people forget how useful that they can be. One example is wifi and a computer pool. The last time I had a problem with my home Internet connection I took my laptop computer into the public library and used the wifi connection to search for information about how to trouble-shoot the problem and come up with a solution. I would have been in a significant "pickle" if I hadn't been able to do that. 

I also remember waiting in line and hearing a woman getting reader service for borrowing CDs on how to learn Spanish. She mentioned that she and her husband are long-haul truck drivers and they were teaching themselves this language while on the road. I have since learned that Spanish is increasingly becoming an informal second official language in the USA, and it is especially useful for truck drivers to learn a working knowledge of this language. French is similarly useful, for obvious reasons. A sustained investigation would no doubt find many, many more examples of how people use the public library for their lively hood. In an information economy the public library is an essential resource for many small businesses.

It is also important to realize that when people say that new technologies are "revolutionary" in the same sense as the steam engine was to the industrial revolution, it is not simply meant that they will change some aspects of the current economic system, but rather that they will turn the current economic system totally upside down and this includes how we use already existing technology too.  3-D printing holds the potential to make centralized, giant factories a thing of the past, as we could see the eventual creation of local "general factories" that have industrial scale printers that can be used to print off individual objects as needed. What does it do to the idea of a national "brand" of something if it is produced at the local 3-D printer instead of a central factory in another city, province, or, country? Of course, we could have large corporations who's job it is to design the items which are then printed off locally. But I suspect that a more likely scenario would involve people using open source alternatives that will be available for free download. Anyone care for a Linux or FreeBSD set of eye-glasses, dishes, or, dustpan? 

This is an important issue to consider. When the Mechanic's Institutes were being created, the new economy of that day wanted people that could be hired by large companies to work at permanent, well-defined jobs. What today's economy wants instead, are independent contractors, consultants, and, entrepeneurs who can learn specific skills necessary for a specific job at a specific time. This is a very different environment---one that is even more dependent on self-learning than the old Industrial Revolution was.

If this seems hard to understand, consider the following project, which is being done using all present-day technology---no 3-D printers or other gee-whiz tech in sight. The key point is that they are all using open-source designs that have been registered with a "Copyleft" agreement and gleaned from best practice all over the world.  

At this point some readers may be thinking "this is all very well, but I am never, ever going to be using any of this stuff.  Moreover, I suspect that the majority of people in the community will never use it either. So why should my tax dollars be used to pay for it?"

The important point to remember is that while you personally may not ever use the public library to learn this sort of thing, this doesn't mean that you will never gain from the work of the people who do use these resources. You may, for example, hire someone to fix your vacuum cleaner who will be able to print off a new part instead of telling you that you need to buy a whole new machine. Or, you may sell something to the fellow who fixes the vacuum cleaner. Economists often inflate the "spin off" benefits that accrue to a community to an absurd level, but the fact of the matter is that no man is an island, and when one person becomes more prosperous this often has "trickle down" benefits for others. And one thing that is for certain, communities that don't adopt new technologies run a huge risk of being "left behind".  Ever heard of something called "the rust belt"?

&&&&

The next question is "OK. I see the value of all of this, but this information is available on the Internet. What has it got to do with a library?" Please note that that the key elements here are "self-directed learning" and "collaborative learning". That is to say that people want to learn specific types of skills---like how to run a 3-D printer. This isn't the same sort of book learning one gets in a college course, because the skill set isn't a formal trade. Instead, it is much like picking up a wrench from a tool box. The skill is a specific response to an individual problem. It might be used over and over again. It might grow into a career path. But it might be used just once for a particular job and never used again. If you looked at the above video (and I recommend you do) you will see an information system that show how to build your own home. If you want to do this, you don't need to get a carpenter's papers---but if you don't even know how to hammer a nail, it can still be pretty intimidating. More to the point, if you want to build it quick, you are going to have to hire and co-ordinate help from the community. That requires groups of people learning how to work together without descending into anarchy---and that too is a specific skill set that needs to be learned.

Both of these are "hands on" skills that can't be learned over the Internet. Oddly enough, we've come full circle as a civilization. The old Mechanic's Institutes existed to teach people the theoretical skills that they couldn't learn from the apprentice system. The new ones that we need today will teach us the tactile learning that many people never get a chance to experience in formal education. If people doubt the value of this, I would suggest that they go to the Library at the University of Guelph where huge areas of the building have been set aside to allow students to learn two different skill sets that can only be learned by doing:  working together in a small group, and, peer-to-peer tutoring.

Libraries around the world are working to fill these emerging needs. For example, here's an academic library that connects students with other students that have specific skills that they want to learn, through what they call a "Knowledge Market". And here's another one that has created what they call a "Maker Space" where students can learn "hands-on skills" building things.

Guelph's New "Mechanic's Institutes"

Like other communities, Guelph has a lot of pent up demand for this sort of learning. As a result, it has followed the same path of the old Guelph Farmer's and Mechanic's Institute. That is volunteer-based non-profit groups and funded by subscription and donation have been formed to help people learn new skillls. These include:

The Diyode community workshop is a place for making, 2500 square feet of tools and supplies for wood working, metal working, electronics, prototyping and crafting. Holding it all together is a community of people who like to get their hands dirty, and are always willing to lend a hand to anyone that wants learn something new. 

Diyode is a non-profit organization with a mandate to foster an enthusiasm for DIY, to spread the idea that it’s better to build something than to buy it, and that it is better to fix something than throw it away. (From the Diode website.)

Tool libraries loan specialized tools for both experienced and inexperienced community members who are interested in repair, maintenance and building projects. Local tool libraries reduce the costs of improving and greening neighbourhoods, thereby transforming homes and community spaces into vibrant places that reflect a commitment to sustainability and environmental concern.

Over 100 tool libraries have been established in North America since 1979. As a member of the Guelph Tool Library, members sign-out tools for both their home and community initiatives. Whether you are hanging a picture or renovating a community park, the Tool Library offers a range of equipment for your project as a low-cost, resource sharing and space-saving alternative to purchasing and owning tools. (From the Guelph Tool Library website.)

A Repair Café is an event where people volunteer to try and fix broken items. Stations will be set up in the hall and outside with volunteers offering to fix damaged items or provide advice about next steps. Tables will be set up for repairing jewellery, simple sewing fixes, small appliance repair, and bike repairs. Volunteers from the University of Guelph Bike Club and Transition Guelph will be among the people helping out. (From the Transition Guelph website.)

While it is great that the community has spontaneously created these new institutions from general interest, I think that a case could be made that they serve such an important public good that they should be funded through the commonweal instead of private charity. Just like the Mechanic's Institute libraries were replaced by municipally-funded public libraries, just so these new social institutions probably will only continue and manifest their full potential if we also make them into a public utility. I would suggest that it makes perfect sense for the Public Library to expand it's core purpose to encompass these functions, as it already has an institutional culture that can easily accommodate them.

&&&&

Archival Collections

When the Guelph Mercury closed it's doors last year there was a bit of a fuss about where the collection of old issues and photos was going to go. The civic museum stepped-in temporarily but eventually the Library took them over. If they hadn't, it is conceivable that the entire collection could have been destroyed. And with it, a huge part of Guelph history would have disappeared with it. Local library archives are the only real institutional repository that most communities have for retaining their history.

The Internet certainly doesn't save local history. That's because web-based resources are primarily aimed at the wider world rather than local areas. Moreover, the vast majority of information that is more that twenty years old simply has yet to be digitized and saved onto server farms. Somebody has to save the old documents, microfilms, photos, etc, go through them manually, label and organize, select out the most useful and important, create catalogues, etc---and then post it on the web. Moreover, this has to be done according to fixed conventions to ensure that anyone who wants to seek out a specific piece of information will have a hope of actually finding the important piece of information that they are seeking.

The Guelph Public Library Archivist Darcy Hiltz,
photo by Bill Hulet

This is a task that is only really properly done by a skilled professional. In Guelph's case, we have Darcy Hiltz. He is the guy that makes sure that the people of Guelph don't lose the photos and records that allow us to have some feel for the history of the place where we live.

There is a fair amount of stuff already digitized and available on the web through a province-wide system that allows local libraries to upload their information into centralized servers. For example, if you look go to the Guelph Public Library (GPL) website and hover over the "local history" button, a menu drops down that includes a variety of items. Just on a whim, I clicked on "Research Your Home", which took me to "Couling Inventory", which eventually brought me to a PDF that showed me an old photo of my house plus a few pieces of information, including when it was built.

Most people can see the value of saving old historical records in and of itself. But these records can also have a practical value. I can remember, for example, a neighbour who was having problems with the city over parking regulations. In effect, the city was telling him that his gravel parking spot was a new addition and they wanted him to rip out a patio and park there instead. Through research in the library archives, he was able to find old photos that showed a Model "T" Ford parked in the gravel spot and a woman in 1950's clothing hanging laundry where the patio was installed. This showed that the existing state of affairs was not something new, but rather an arrangement that was as old as the house---which made it "legal, non-conforming" in the eyes of the Ontario Municipal Board.


&&&&

Library as Community Access Hub

Recently I was at a social event and met a woman who was just recovering from a bad fall where she fractured a couple vertebrates and broke a couple ribs. She had been working for a pizza store but lost the job because of the interruption in work. She was getting to the point where she was contemplating getting a new job, so she was looking. Unfortunately, at that point her laptop gave up the ghost and she said that she was reduced to applying on her cell phone, which was a pain.

This raises an important issue. Access to the Internet is increasingly a necessity for people to look for work, apply for government services, shop, and so on. If you don't have a computer or access to the Web, you really can be a "second class citizen". Libraries are increasingly the entry point for essential services that many people cannot access anywhere else.  One interesting idea that I found while researching this article was a Library in Denmark that understands how important this Internet access feature can be and expanded the concept by bringing together a variety of government services to create a "one stop shopping experience".

The spaceship-like structure houses...  ...a municipal service center for residents and newcomers where citizens can pick up their identification card, renew their passports, and register with the municipality...

Right now the federal, provincial, and, municipal governments all offer services through the post-office, city hall, and, machines in shopping malls. Why not consolidate some of these services and put in a "public service" portal in the Guelph Public Library where people could buy bus tickets, renew their passport, etc?  If the library had the space it could sub-contract with various government agencies to rent them the space for these various service---many of which the Library is already subsidizing by being the only entry point for their web-based services for many low-income people. Indeed, if you think about it, this has always been an important service of public libraries because job ads, public service announcements, etc, used to be an important feature in the news papers that libraries used to provide.

&&&&

Library as "Third Place"

Theorists of community sometimes talk about the need for a "Third Place". This is a place besides home and work where people can meet formally or informally to interact with friends, neighbours, and, strangers in a way that builds community. These sorts of places can include barber shops, pool halls, bowling alleys, coffee shops, pubs, etc, but those institutions have their own agendas, which can mitigate against this function. For example, most bars play loud music to discourage conversation---which can slow the rate of alcohol consumption and cut into profits.

The great guru of third place is a sociologist by the name of Ray Oldenburg, who has written two books on the subject:  Celebrating the Third Space, and, The Great Good Place. He defines a third place as having the following characteristics:

• Free or inexpensive
• Food and drink, while not essential, are important
• Highly accessible: proximate for many (walking distance)
• Involve regulars – those who habitually congregate there
• Welcoming and comfortable
• Both new friends and old should be found there.

In a world where people are increasingly isolated into their own little cyber-world, it is tremendously important that our society creates spaces where people can meet face-to-face in an informal, public setting.

Libraries increasingly accept this emerging role and have configured their buildings to meet this challenge. The U of Guelph Library, for example, has a large area on the first floor which is designated as the "Academic Town Square" for informal connections between members of the university community and it has also brought in a Starbucks franchise to also allow people to buy coffee and light meals.

Have a cup of J.O.E. at the GPL!

The Guelph Public Library has also attempted to pursue this mandate through a partnership with J.O.E., a community group that helps developmentally disabled individuals by giving them work experience selling coffee to library patrons. Originally, this was to be a pilot project until the GPL moved to the bigger space on Baker Street, where J.O.E. would have had its own cafe from which they would give a percentage of revenue to the library. That, of course, is now on hold. Hopefully, when the GPL moves to a larger space, it will be able to honour this original commitment.

&&&&

Future Stories

As I hope is obvious from the above, I think it is clear that there is still a role for a public library in Guelph. In future articles I hope to discuss some related issues, such as the past controversy surrounding the demolition of the Carnegie library building, the state of the existing building, funding models, the role of the main library versus branches, and so on. Sign up for the RSS feed, twitter, or, FaceBook to keep informed! And if you can afford it, please consider making a donation---either one time through the "donate" button on the upper right hand of the page, or, a monthly micro-payment through the "Patreon" button.