Relections on Iceland's volcano

As all of Europe and probably most of the rest of the world now knows, ash spewed from Iceland's Eyjafjallajokull volcano has shut down much of Europe's airspace. It's obviously a tremendous inconvenience to would-be airline passengers, and a serious hit on the finances of a great many airlines and airports. Perhaps less obvious are three interesting implications of the eruption.












Iceland is comparatively far from Europe, but even western Russia and northern Italy are being affected, and flights from or to Europe have been canceled around the globe. Officials are sounding public health warnings about the ash, as well. We're four days into this phase of the eruption, with no indication of how much longer it will last; it's conceivable that ash in the atmosphere will come to affect air travel throughout the northern hemisphere. It is a very dramatic illustration of how weather events in one part of the world affect life and commerce quite remote from the event. We would do well to remember Eyjafjallajokull when we consider the effects of climate change!

This also highlights the extent to which modern economies and consumers have become dependent on high altitude jetliner travel. High altitude insertion of greenhouse gases is particularly pernicious. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has estimated that aviation is responsible for around 3.5% of anthropogenic climate change, and the impact is growing. It would be good if Eyjafjallajokull leads us to be more mindful of the need to reduce the impact of jet travel on the global climate.

One of the many impacts being felt in Europe is the impending loss of most fresh produce deliveries, as much of Europe's produce is flown in. I'll bet that is coming as a surprise to a great many shoppers! This should highlight how even such a simple act as eating a fresh fruit contributes to our greenhouse gas emissions. Perhaps Eyjafjallajokull will encourage consumers to choose locally grown foods? One can hope.

Virginia Treason Month

The governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, my own state, has named April to be "Confederate History Month." One wonders why. What does he think we should celebrate? Treason? Bloody, needless war? The attempted destruction of the United States? Slavery?

Oh, I know, apologists for the secessionists will reject the treason charge. But what is the truth? Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, Stonewall Jackson, James Longstreet, George Pickett, Jeb Stuart, Jubal Early, and just about all of the other Confederate "heroes" swore to "bear true allegiance to the United States of America, and [to] serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies or opposers whatsoever." No exceptions, no limitations, no avenues for evasion, no escape clause. And certainly no allowance for rebellion. Oath-breakers, all. Enemies and opposers of the United States. Treason. Is this what Governor McDonell wants to honor?

The same apologists will blithely skip over the terrible blood price of their war, or wrap it in a filmy gauze. But face it; the War of Southern Treason was the bloodiest war in our history, even when counted in absolute numbers; deadlier than both World Wars combined. As a proportion of our population, their war was even worse, killing nearly one out of every 50 Americans, and maiming far more. Those weren't numbers; they were sons, husbands, brothers, fathers, dying in agony, millions of man-years of potential life, snuffed out. Hundreds of thousands of families shattered, widows and children thrust into destitution, wives and mothers keening for their dead. Is that what Governor McDonell wants to celebrate?

The proclamation refers to the South's treasonous war as "a war between the states for independence." Independence? No, destruction of the United States. Destruction just as sure as envisioned by any of our foreign enemies. Funny how many apologists for the Confederacy today proclaim loudly an espoused patriotism for the country their heros tried to destroy. Had the South succeeded in seceding, what would have become of what was left? Every regional squabble would have carried the threat of further dissolution, until North America was utterly Balkanized, with its various fragments lurching form one European alliance to another, dragging us into innumerable wars. Where, then, would have been the bastion of hope, the arsenal of democracy, when the Nazis marched over Europe, when Stalin looked for conquest?

The governor speaks of the "sacrifices" of Confederate leaders and soldiers. What of the sacrifices of the millions of heros who paid with their blood and sweat to save the United States from the terror the Southerners brought to the land? They are the ones I would honor.

And then there was that little matter unmentioned by the governor, that curious institution which bound men and women as property of other men and women. What was slavery? Do they reflect on that as they celebrate "Confederate History Month"? What do those who wax nostalgic for the Old South think of slavery? As little more than a form of employment for those enslaved, exchanging their labor for room and board, and not of much significance beyond that? Slavery was oppression, at its most vile. A human being who had no future but toil. A human being utterly subjected to the whims and caprices of his and her oppressor. Men and women denied the ability to strive for better lives, build families, raise children, know their parents and their brothers and sisters. Women raped to serve the carnal lusts of their oppressors. Men beaten and humiliated to profit and amuse the heartless who commanded them, the psychopaths who abused them. What would the governor have us celebrate about the effect of the Confederacy upon their lives?

Oh, I know, the apologists will argue that the South's treason was about states rights, and a way of life, and an economic order. But slavery was the essential link to all of those things. Without slavery, the supposed cause of states' rights would have been meaningless, except perhaps to debating societies. Without slavery, the Southern way of life wouldn't have existed. Without slavery, the Southern economic order would not have been opposed to the rest of the country. The Civil War was about slavery; the Confederacy was about the debasement of millions of Americans. Is that what Governor McDonell wants to honor?

I hope not. For if it is, neither he nor his supporters understand anything about what America is. The Confederacy belongs in the dustbin of history. If this sorry chapter in Virginia's history is to be remembered, it should be understood for what it was, so that this country can finally overcome the errors that led to this greatest violation of Americans' rights, and our bloodiest war.

Do School Libraries Need Books?

The New York Times online op-ed page includes a feature entitled "Room for Debate: A Running Commentary on the News." Following on a news account of a prep school's decision to remove the books from its library, "Room for Debate" earlier this month asked the question "Do School Libraries Need Books?" Except for the head master of that school, the participants - authors, a professor and a school library director -- answered with a resounding "Yes."

Today's "Room for Debate" continues the discussion with "The Library, Through Students’ Eyes." In most cases, the educational level of the students queried wasn't given, which is too bad, but most read like high schoolers. Be that as it may, several participants echoed the oft-heard critique that books and the libraries that own them are obsolete. Like the similar critiques frequently given by those in positions of greater authority, the arguments have enormous holes in them.

One student wrote "Books are very expensive and schools could put that money toward many other investments such as charities, fund raisers, proms, etc." This chestnut probably requires little comment, although one is left wondering about this student's concept of schooling in general. The same student went on to state that "Students, such as [the writer] do use the Internet for nearly every assignment because of online encyclopedias/databases, online texts, blogs and other Web sites and search engines." Another extolled the currency of the electronic, stating that "Online research ... typically yields more up-to-date and accurate information than books," contrasting books with "online journal databases, JSTOR, etc., [which] are invaluable."

As a librarian in a library catering to scholarly researchers, I have a perspective that some of these students might lack. First of all, my researchers use both electronic and traditional print resources extensively. For example, about 19% of my book collection circulates annually, and interlibrary borrowing of books adds an effective 10% on top of that -- that's heavy usage. My online journals aren't accessed nearly as often (and aren't expected to be). Serious scholars continue to rely on books to a very significant degree. Perhaps surprisingly, many of the books my researchers use are comparatively old, too, although they're also interested in my new books.

Second, books aren't library budget busters. My annual book acquisition budget is far, far lower than my electronic journal and database budget. Any one of our more extensive online journal services and commercial databases (e.g., Academic OneFile, LexisNexis, SCOPUS) cost more than my entire book budget. And yes, those services, too, come from the library and its budget; they're not the product of the school administration waving a magic wand. Where the old library only acquired paper books and journals, the contemporary libary needs to do not only that, but subscribe to a host of expensive electronic resoruces. (Admittedly, space is a separate and costly issue, and sooner or later libraries face very difficult weeding decisions as a result.)

Third, some of these students' comments undermine their own arguments. For instance, one cited JSTOR as an example of an up-to-date resource ... and I've heard the very same assumption from many of my own library's patrons. Wrong! JSTOR is a wonderful resource, but it is archival and not current. Nor is it meant to be; for most journals covered by JSTOR, there's a five year moratorium; for almost all of the rest it's a three year moratorium. Even many of the journals covered by more current journal services, such as Academic OneFile and Academic Search Premier, are embargoed for several months or even a year. Woe to the researchers who assume that by searching JSTOR or other online services that they've located the current literature on a topic!

Moreover, some of these students' comments echo a common failing which most librarians (and faculty) must confront: students have great difficulty separating quality research material from the chaff freely available on the Internet. A simple question illustrates the problem: which source is more trustworthy and presents material which is more effectively vetted: a blog written by an unknown writer (such as me!) or a book or journal published by a major academic press? There is an enormous literature on this topic, but it all comes done to a single point: most students cannot effectively separate the wheat from the chaff on the Internet, and by relying on it instead of more traditional information sources make their research weaker, not stronger.

Lurking behind this entire debate is the issue of funding, and the frequent desire of administrators to pare back their budgets. Libraries look like easy targets, but the reality is that the advent of electronic resources is the principal engine driving up library costs, not books. Libraries need both if they are to serve the information needs of their patrons, and administrators ill serve their researchers by trying to skimp.

Mission accomplished

The College Road Trip did what it was supposed to do: bring clarity. It was also fun, mostly.

Long, long drive down to Wise, in the rain. Lot's of snow hanging around from December's big storm, some still pretty, some not. Near Radford a farm field of concentric furrows, with snow in the troughs, was particularly striking. Not many trucks on the road, thankfully - not much traffic at all. 27.7 m.p.g. in the Chevy truck; not bad, but hardly green.

Wise is pretty remote, a little town up in the mountains. Definitely coal country. Must be really beautiful in the Spring and Fall. UVa-Wise surprised by being thoroughly modern. Liked the school and liked the people, but Goldilocks would have understood: it was too small. Thought that would be an attraction, but it wasn't.

Liked Longwood U. a lot when she visited it last year, but was generally underwhelmed this time around. Did like the chair of one of the prospective majors, but that wasn't enough. Farmville is bigger than Wise, but somehow neither the town nor the school rang her bell this year.

But Radford! Loved Radford. Loved the size - big enough to offer a lot of variety, small enough to still be personal. Loved the look, rather what Hollywood thinks a college should be. Liked the majors, and really impressed by some of the faculty. Liked the amenities, liked the town. Had lunch with the daughter of a friend who's a senior there, and what she had to say just added to the enthusiasm. Will take real commitment, especially to being proactive in seeking help - tutors, profs, library, etc., but I'm pretty sure she gets it. And the help seems to be there for those who seek it.

Decision made.

And I didn't embarrass her.

College Road Trip

We're going on a college road trip!

Daughter worried that she'd never get into college, but dutifully sent in early admission apps to three schools. Minor snafu when the high school counselor forgot to send in transcripts, but that was resolved in time.

Pick up the phone at work; daughter screaming. First thought: something terribly wrong! Second thought: no, wonderfully right!

Admitted! To her first choice school. About a week later, another letter: admitted to a school she didn't think would accept her. (Still waiting to hear form the third.)

Much fretting over which to accept. A slowly dawning smile when I reminded her that a couple of weeks earlier she worried about never getting into college. This is a far, far better dilemma.

So we're leaving Sunday. Four days, three schools, a lifetime to chart.

I'm told that under no circumstances am I to sing "Double Dutch Bus." Or anything else to embarrass her.

Not your grandmother's tofu

Even as a long-time vegetarian, I find that I sometimes miss the taste of meats I once associated with pleasant experiences; the smell of cooking bacon, for instance, reminds me of family camping trips. So this article from the 29 November 2009 Sunday Times on real meat that isn't the product of slaughter houses is intriguing: Scientists Grow Pork Meat in a Laboratory.

Obviously there's still need for further development (not the least being the nature of the growth medium being used with the prototype), but a source of meat free of the slaughterhouse and free of the most deleterious environmental effects of the meat industry would be very, very welcome.

Why I don't use FedEx

Today at about 12:30, a FedEx truck stopped in front of my house. Grown daughter was home and saw the truck. Daughter guessed that the driver was bringing our new cell phones, and waited for the doorbell. No doorbell. No knock. Truck drives off. Daughter checks the door, and finds a hanger saying nobody was home, that we can get the package by driving to their office ... about 45 minutes away ... or take a chance on their "delivering" it on another day. I come home. Daughter describes what happened. I call FedEx and complain. And maybe, maybe, it will be delivered on Friday.

Did I mention that although I don't use FedEx, Verizon does?