Should we separate the collection by genre?
This is a difficult question, in my opinion, but an important one to consider. My current library separates fiction by genre, and as a mystery reader I have appreciated being able to go straight to the mystery section and browse for titles there. But I recognize there are several problems with this separation. First, many books don't fit well into a particular genre - so where do we put them? Second, it doesn't help readers expand their horizons very well. Third, it can send messages about value that we don't really want to send.
For these reasons I say that we should NOT separate novels based on genre classifications. Let me elaborate.
1. Genre is really an artificial designation.
A book can contain elements of mystery, romance, and science fiction, or any other typical genre. For example, I just read Throwback, by Maureen Goo. NoveList lists it as a science fiction novel, presumably because there is time travel. But if you loved science fiction I think you would be sorry to read this book, because there's really no science, and the time travel is just a plot device to get the right people together so the story can proceed. So not only do books span genres, collections staff have to decide which of many items is most important in where to place the item. Perhaps it's time to take an innovative step in our libraries and ditch genre altogether. It should still be listed in the catalog as a searchable term, but then you can have all the appropriate genres there as searchable terms so the books can be found be anyone interested in them.
2. Separation doesn't help readers expand their horizons.
If I only browse the Mystery section then I don't start to explore any new genres. As someone who has been reading mysteries for over 40 years, I have to admit that sometimes I just walk any and say "nah, nah, read that, read that, nah" and walk out without a book. If the books were mixed together I might say "hey, that looks interesting" and launch into a new genre or author. Barry Trott (Trott & Novak, 2006) points out that many authors write in a number of different genres. Having all of those books shelved together helps a reader choose a new genre with a tried and trusted author. This could then lead the reader to move outside of that "old" genre to explore new kinds of books and grow as a reader. These are good things that we want for our patrons.
3. Separation can send messages about value.
Placement of the different genres can make a huge difference. In my library the Romance and Large Print fiction are most prominently place, probably because most of our patrons like those books. Fantasy and Science Fiction are off to one side, adult Graphic Novels are back out of the way, and Urban Fiction is in the farthest back corner. What do those placements say? They make it clear that certain types of fiction are not popular, and maybe they even suggest that we are uncomfortable with some of those books. If we mix them all together then there is no chance that that message is sent - even if it is not meant.
An idea
This topic has made me think about how we can help patrons read more widely, and how we can honor all the kinds of books that the library owns. I think that when we do displays about topics we need to be sure we are including all different genres in the display. So, what if we're doing a display about Romance titles in February - could we include some other genres as well? Even some non-fiction? Some displays would be harder than others, but I think working to include that variety would open patrons' eyes to the wide variety of options available to them.
References
Trott, B., & Novak, V. (2006). A House Divided? Reference & User Services Quarterly, 46(2), 33–38. https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.5860/rusq.46n2.33
Hi Janna! I love that you talked about how placement alludes to prominence. Not only does Urban Fiction being in the back allude to it not being popular, and even maybe an afterthought, but how many patrons actually make it all the way back there to peruse? So often I see patrons that come in just for the computers stop and at least look at the displays near the desk, if not the first few rows of stacks, but those people aren't walking all the way to the back of the building to discover new reads.
ReplyDeleteExactly, Abigail. Maybe we have to think like salespeople and put the stuff they really want at the back of the "store" and make them walk through all of the "merchandise." :)
DeleteYour second point brings up an interesting experiment! The efficacy of grouping by genre and subgenre versus shelving them all together by author only. Say we remove the variable of using the online catalog to search for the book. Then run the experiment with a sectioned off collection, and then again with one without sections. We can track library users that already have a book they are searching for, or are exploring the shelves looking for one to spark their interest, and record results for both. Record those that walk away with books in hand as successes. Get qualitative data on the finding and selection experience in post-experiment questionnaires.
ReplyDeleteCorey, that's a great idea! And now after having said we should put things together (while I was reading this post) I thought "but we shouldn't put the graphic novels with the other novels" and my reason is that they are catalogued by series title. So it's a different way to think about finding something. Hmm. I have to think about this more. There's so much to this question - which is why it's a great one for a research study!
DeleteI strongly agree with your first point. While of course there are books clearly within genre lines, there are so many others that cross those lines. I like digital tags where we can choose as many as apply, not just one! Also, your comment about putting the good (popular) stuff in the back and making people walk through the "merchandise" made me laugh out loud. It would be a fun experiment for sure!
ReplyDeleteI really found the point on where the collections are put to be interesting. I can speak from experience in that what is separated out at my library does not get checked out, and I think it has to do with what you said. The placement shows bias. This does make a strong argument to not separate books out of the collection.
ReplyDeleteI love your section over value. It's one of the top concern for separation because patrons might feel like one section gets more attention or resource than another section. Placing a section in the back can be about space, but more often its about value. As librarians it's our job to promote evenly, how can we do that when a section is not viewed equally with the others. It's the same way with size, if one section is overly small or large than that sends a message to the patrons.
ReplyDelete