Against Little Free Libraries (2017)

Virtue signaling goes both ways. Yes, there's plenty of middle class progressive virtue signaling in having a little free library, but there's also plenty in bashing them as a threat to the public library system. Progressiver-than-thou is a seriously annoying thing.

My own gripe against them isn't the virtue signaling, but rather the KonMari problem. People who read tend to treat books as sacred. Throwing books out is a sin, even if the books are, frankly, junk. I live in one of those neighborhoods they describe, with a little free library or two on every block, and they are often stuffed with garbage books that someone couldn't bear to throw out - old Danielle Steele and Steven King novels, obsolete computer books, etc. It's okay to throw books out, it really is. The magic isn't in the book, it's in the reading.

That said, there are other ways to do Good Work with books besides little free libraries and the public library system. My spouse works with a nonprofit that distributes books for underprivileged children. Every time she buys something on Amazon, she also buys a children's book - exclusively books that feature non-white characters. Her goal isn't just to get books in the hands of poor children, but to get minority kids images that look like themselves, and get the white kids images that look like someone else.

Look I don't use the actual library as much as I want to (Seattle). When I was job hunting it was one of the last places I went to to be productive. The open hours are abysmal,(10AM-6PM) was a common one. That being said I have found use in these tiny libraries just knowing I might pick up something interesting - and I try to return or find another spot to donate a book of my own. It's not like they're stealing funding from the city? Virtue signaling? Wealthy neighborhoods? Some people just like books and want to give back.

I live in a relatively wealthy neighborhood (Alameda, CA) next to a relatively poor neighborhood (Oakland). Lots of LFLs around. Recently we've had an issue with people raiding the LFLs - taking all the books at once. When confronted, one of these raiders admitted that she was taking all the free books in order to sell them to the nearest used bookstore for a quick bit of cash.

I think they have their place, though, depending on the circumstances. In my town, you don't see these in the higher-income neighborhoods at all, you see them in the lower-income neighborhoods where there are no public library branches.

They tend to be filled with light recreational reading and children's books.

The main problem I've seen with them is that they usually aren't weatherproofed enough, causing books to get water damaged, and they provide an irresistible temptation for vandals.

"Little Free Libraries predominantly appear in medium- to high-income neighborhoods" Because they don't want them vandalized or raided.

"registration fee of $40 to use the Little Free Library name." OK, legit criticism. The idea you can trademark a phrase as generic and descriptive as "Little Free library" is bullshit.

The quality of content, other than popular fiction which I care not to read, is horrendous at every community library I have browsed the stacks of. What the librarians decide we should like just seems not a good enough solution. Perhaps a more distributed model where people can bring their own books to share, silently hoping someone else will enjoy them, is far more interesting than that of government employees (regardless of their great intentions) deciding for us. Probably unrealistic but my $0.02

I get the perspective, but the public library folks pushing this position are really cheapening what libraries are.

Books are a commodity with low or no value very very quickly. 90% of books as a commodity are worth less than a bottle of soda within months of publication. A LFL is really a way to connect with neighbors and get rid of surplus books taking up space in a way that is potentially better than dumping them in a bin.

A public library is in my mind a nearly magical place that's about learning and information. I'm lucky to live in a place with a vibrant library system. Our local branch is full of kid and adults doing homework, reading, playing, etc. Books are a big part of the expression of that, not the mission.

Something I'm not seeing represented in the comments: Libraries are already under attack. The library in my hometown was the subject of national reporting for the attempt by theocrats to attempt to remove gay parenting books from the library. It was vigorously protested by members of the community, the state ACLU actually sent someone to speak at our county commissioners court meeting. Its still ongoing and the fight has shifted terrain, but my point is that things like the LFL are used, again and again, as ways to undermine state institutions. When individuals and groups with a motive to attack and undermine a specific institution can point to an alternative that allows them to say they aren't actually, say, anti-intellectual, they will do that. On top of that, its worth pointing out that libraries represent the spectrum of human achievement and failure on their shelves. There's a beautiful quote on the wall in the downtown branch (Harold Washington) that goes something to the effect of "libraries are a record of both human genius and stupidity". Librarians are there to make sure that books that are records of our past, that may not have wide cultural currency, are not only preserved and defended, but accessible to the public for free. Exchanging that for an upper middle class located box of, truth be told, overwhelmingly Dan Brown style potboilers seems like a really bad call. Librarians as a group are one of the fiercest defenders of free speech we have in this society, and we subtlety undermine them when we crow about "free" boxes of mass market paperbacks and, at least in texas, where for awhile I stopped constantly to check, lots and lots of conservative Regnery-type political screeds and Protestant apologetics.

The absolite vitrol at the fact that WHITE people were psying money out of their pocket for community libraries which had the side-benefit of projecting a certain image baffled me.

The fact that a paid product was used disperportionstely by rich peoppe who could afford them, and educated people that read was blindingly obvious. The fact that areas which already had libraries would have many of these paid mini libraries is fairly obvious because areas with libraries are full of readers. I fail to grasp the point of much of yheir demographic analysis.

For an article so firm that little libraries were virtue signalling this article was chock full of bog standard progressive virtue signalling like bashing on something because white people participate in it. Goddamned fucking White people reading and sharing after they've finished smh.

Over the years, I've developed a process:

1) [99% of commodity books are not sacred] -> if it's damaged, through it out / break it down for recycling.

2) if it's of general interest, donate it to the friends of the library bookstore and let them sell it for 25 - 50 cents.

3) if it's too esoteric for [2], pass it along to a used and scholarly bookstore if there is one nearby.

I am not going to spend my time maintaining a piece of miniature architecture to do something that can be done so much better and easier already. (And I'm especially not paying a registration fee to do so.)

> [a] librarian [... said] “As a librarian, my gut reaction to that was, ‘You know what else is a free library? A regular library.’”

With all respect to librarians, this is a bit silly. There are public libraries that also call themselves "Free". It's a bit of an outdated distinction, sure, but they've had their names for decades. (And there still exist libraries that are not lending libraries or not open to the general public; mostly attached to universities at this point, but not "free".)

For those of you who didn't read to the end:

> Nobody finds Colson Whitehead’s The Underground Railroad in a Little Free Library—much less Wi-Fi, college counseling, or jobs services. A well-funded library system has little to fear.

"Little Free Libraries" have nothing to do with public libraries, and seem like a harmless way for people to spend their disposable income. They may be virtue signaling, charity, lawn decorations, recycling bins, or whatever, but I don't see any reason to complain about them.

Wow what a hit piece, who knew that the venal politics of corporate America extended all the way down to the knitting circle level.

More interesting, there are "mobile libraries" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_Books

At least LFLs don't have vagrants and homeless lousing up the place like public libraries do.

Bingo:

"'We submit that these data reinforce the notion that [Little Free Libraries] are examples of performative community enhancement, driven more so by the desire to showcase one’s passion for books and education than a genuine desire to help the community in a meaningful way.

[ . . . ]

[Little Free Libraries] are a highly visible form of self-gratification cleverly disguised as book aid, and the effects of this visibility can be better understood through a consideration of their role in a landscape . . .'"