The Ethicist and Librarians

Recently,  The Ethicist column in the New York Times Magazine tackled a question from a librarian: 

In short, if you believe a patron is being scammed, do you intervene, or does that violate his privacy and professional boundaries? 

It’s a fairly common question among librarians–do you agree with Randy Cohen’s (and the NYPL’s) response? (CJ)

The Author is Listening

Here’s an interesting question:  How would you change your review if you knew the author was reading it, and very likely to respond to it?  Even terrible books often get good reviews, something I cynically attribute to the fact that the literary world is so small.  There’s been interesting discussion around this topic before, in the fact that unsigned Kirkus Reviews tend to be harsher than the signed reviews in Library Journal.

Shortly after I posted the previous bit about Quiet, Please, I got an email from the author.  I had planned to write an eviscerating analysis of the book, but receiving that email took the wind out of my sails.  It probably says more about me than anything else–that I prefer to rant in monologue form, rather than dialogue.

What do you think?  Could you be completely honest in this situation?  What if a colleague you saw regularly wrote a book and you thought it was terrible and were asked to review it?  What if other libraries were making their purchasing decisions based on what you wrote?  Would it be different if you were writing the review anonymously?  (CJ)

Quiet, Please! – Did you Read it?

Resurrecting the Staff Reading and Readers Advisory blog to ask this important question:

Did you read this book?  Quiet, Please : Dispatches from a Public Librarian by Scott Douglas. 

Please comment below if you have!  I feel like this might be a book that would incur some strong reactions. (CJ)