The first plenary yesterday after noon was on the future of the profession.
There were three short presentations:
Debby Shorley: above all we must do our jobs properly, and not get bogged down in acronyms, initiatives and pay and status. She stressed the power and value of information and laid some myths about the death of the book and of subject librarians.
Bob Usherwood: compared two dystopias, Huxley's Brave New World and Orwell's 1984. The former, in which people submit willingly to their oppression, is, he thought, the more likely. The role of libraries is to change people, not merely to amuse them.
Margaret Watson said an odd thing: "we don't have control over the future of the profession'. I'm not sure what she meant, for while we can't control the social, political and economic circumstances in which we find ourselves, and we of course must determine our future in consolation with those who use our services, and with other professions, if we can't take charge of the future of the profession, who can?
There wasn't time for much discussion, and I wanted to say something about the usefulness of looking at other professions, specifically medicine. Someone gave a rather partial definition of a profession, and I wanted to expand on that too.
Recent Comments