Extreme specialization is for insects.

[lostnfound]

Juxtapose this:

I've been doing a little genealogy research lately, and was fascinated to read the occupations of the tradesmen in the 1800s.. Even then there were still tradespeople listed as 'umbrella maker' or 'shoemaker' or 'watchmaker' or 'draper' (cloth maker). My job could be described as 'paper-pusher' so I am always a bit intrigued by people who actually PRODUCE stuff.

The next day I was in the library, apologizing for a rain-damaged kid's book, and opening my wallet. The librarian told me not to worry about paying for it. "It would be too expensive to replace; we are going to scrap it, but we won't replace it." What a shame, I thought. "Well, let me at least write down the title; I will try to find a copy online," I said.

"Oh no, don't waste your time or money. If you bought a replacement, and tried to donate it, we couldn't accept it anyway."

"Why not??" I asked.

"See these little labels? We don't put those on. There's an outside company that's under contract to do those. It would be too expensive for us to do them. And these plastic covers, too. So with all this processing, we aren't allowed to accept donated books."



Is it too much to ask that a librarian ought to be empowered and have the wherewithal to take a donated book and get it onto a library shelf? I understand the cost of processing might be lowered by subcontracting such work out -- reduced cost is good -- but why is there no value placed on flexibility, on having an alternate process to permit acceptance of donated books (or for that matter, to permit the repair of books with torn labels)?

Twenty years ago our librarians could cover, label AND bind books. Binding books is time-consuming and expensive, I understand, but a label?? My 5 year old can do that.

I feel sad and regretful that a fine, old book with beautiful illustrations was ruined and there's apparently nothing I can do to restore the damage done to our local library which is diminished by its loss.

I will write a letter to our library system about this -- and I know that the problem isn't the worker, it's the management. But I'm ranting about this on DU because I see it everywhere, and IMHO it is a dangerous pattern of excess interdependence and overly centralized processes. In the meantime, too, I think people feel specialized to a point of meaninglessness or absurdity, and dumbed down in the process. It's the type of disempowered society that we used to criticize the USSR for. We need the values of self-sufficiency, self-reliance, and availability of localized resources to be given due consideration. Efficient, outsourced processes have their place, but IMHO, the value of flexibility and resourcefulness are too often overlooked.

[Jack_DeLeon]

1. I agree with you...

there are too many people who just say "thats not my job."

[sendero]

2. Correct...

... and well said.

The (analogous) assembly-line factory (where everyone does some tiny specialized task over and over) might be good for production, but it is anathema for workers.