I think separating books into subgenres permanently can be a slippery slope. Very rarely do books fit into one category and doing so can make searching difficult for patrons. I especially don't agree with separating books based on community complaints, as mentioned in the Iowa Library article. For me, that inches way too close to censorship. I believe positively highlighting books that belong in certain subgenres on end caps or book displays is a more efficient way to manage the collection. It's all about the intention behind the separation that is important.
Using end caps or book displays brings attention to certain books without having to assign a subgenre to each one. Patrons looking for a specific book or browsing will still be able to find titles that interest them. Librarians can also navigate away from bowing to community pressure and separating books that contain questioned content from their rightful place with the other books in their genre.
The one reason I could see separating a subgenre is if the books themselves are in high demand and the library wants to highlight them permanently and make them more easily accessible to interested patrons. In my library in Elkhart, we have the Urban Fiction at the very front of the Fiction section because it's in such high demand, our librarians wanted to make sure our patrons could go right to it and browse. I see this as a positive reason for separation.
These are some very good points. I specifically like your point about a potential reason to separate for good. I struggled to think of a good reason for separation. I suppose high demand for that specific community is appropriate. If there is such a high demand, that means many are reading them and it will make it less likely that the patrons checking those books out will be judged harshly by other patrons.
ReplyDeleteThe intention is so important! You make some very excellent slopes (and I loved our title!). Full points!
ReplyDelete