This commentary is by Malcolm Bell, a resident of Randolph Center.
While I was growing up, books printed on paper and bound in cloth, cardboard, or sometimes leather formed an enriching part of my life. My parents bought many books cheap during the Depression, and I borrowed books from the local public library.
Then I attended Harvard (easier to enter then than now), which had a vast physical library system. If it had had only yet-to-be-invented digital books, I doubt that I would have gone there.
Vermont State University’s new president, Dr. Parwinder Grewal, showed good sense and a becoming humility last summer by attending a five-day workshop at Harvard for new college presidents. I wish him well with his new responsibilities, but believe that he will be committing a dreadful mistake if he goes ahead and gets rid of the university’s physical books and transitions to all-digital libraries.
Sticking to this course will, I fear, cast a shadow over whatever else he achieves in his exciting new position.
When I was confirmed in the Episcopal Church, my parents gave me a leather-bound Bible. While I am no longer an Episcopalian, I still treasure that book. If Dr. Grewal’s view spreads far enough, I suppose, future churchgoers may see a MacBook on the pulpit instead of a Bible.
Since the physical Bible has intrinsic value, don’t lesser physical books too? If they don’t, why do so many newsworthy people choose to be interviewed for TV in front of their personal bookshelves?
VTDigger reported Feb. 10 that the decision to make the university’s libraries totally digital was based largely on a survey that found that most of the 10% of the students who responded to it “felt that their academic needs were being met with digital media alone.” But meeting academic needs is far different from getting the most out of college.
Dr. Grewal later stated, “If more than (that many) students could have responded, maybe we would have made a different decision.” So a tiny fraction — less than one-tenth — of the undergraduates maybe shaped the decision of the more mature and experienced professionals.
I appreciate their decision to consult the students, but not their apparent attempt to hide behind them. Harry Truman taught that the buck stops with the president.
VTDigger also reported the administration’s conclusion that getting rid of the physical books will save space and eliminate seven full-time jobs and three part-time jobs. But doing so will be the height of penny-wise, pound-foolish. It will surely cut the number of students applying for admission and may cause others to transfer out.
Does anyone think that browsing through a digital library (if that is possible) can equal the intellectual stimulation and pleasure of browsing through a library of real books?
It was heartening to watch the news on NBC local affiliate WPTZ Feb. 13 as many Castleton University students poignantly protested this decision that obviously upsets them and is sure to hurt them.
According to the same broadcast, “University officials continue to say the library going all-digital will make it more accessible to commuter and nontraditional students.” But this is not true if the university keeps its physical books as well.
The officials also “said they’re planning to continue listening to students’ concerns.” But listening with no intention of heeding is a patronizing putdown.
The administration is currently teaching the students a lesson about power that is probably not in their curriculum. But it’s not too late for the administration to set an example of maturity, humility, concern, and good sense by admitting its misjudgment and correcting it.
Digital books serve several useful purposes, for research and during a pandemic and so on; they should certainly be available for students and faculty. But physical books help to instill a lifelong love of reading and learning that pages on a computer screen simply can’t.
No matter what students do with their lives after graduating, isn’t this a large part of what a university education is all about?
