Skip to content

One more notch up Maslow’s hierarchy

Today is the go-live day of MPOW’s OCLC authorization for interlibrary loan. Prior to this, our ILL procedure involved paper forms, which partly explains why we did 4 ILLs last year, the other half of that being that we charged patrons, and the third half being that we hadn’t conditioned patrons that we provide this service.

So let me digress from the momentous occasion to ponder charging for ILLs. If we buy a book we think patrons might use, we don’t charge them. If we buy a book a patron requests, we don’t charge them. So why do some libraries–most of them, perhaps?–charge patrons for interlibrary loans, in some cases passing on the entire cost, in other cases charging a flat fee?

The answer can’t be that libraries are poor, because the syllogism then fails, due to the other conditions. My guess is it’s a mix of habit plus a view of the library budget that is focused on thingies rather than services (the  ownership/access seesaw). Charging for ILLs is also oriented toward the idea that the library makes most of the collection decisions. An ILL is, after all, a patron-driven selection.

Meanwhile, I need to get up and out, but–call me Nerdbrarian–my heart flutters that My Place of Work now has the capability to request and provide items worldwide. We’re still in need of procedures, policies, training, and marketing, but we have a chassis with four wheels and an engine in it!

Oh, and on conditioning patrons: at the EPA library I managed in the late 1990s, my boss, an engineer and a huge library supporter, said “People need to be conditioned to use libraries.” It’s absolutely true. A library is a truly amazing service, so amazing that no one could possibly divine all the things it can do for people. We can have wonderful services, but if patrons don’t know about them, the job isn’t complete.

I’m a Big Fan of Fans

Today someone said, “You know, the library even smells better these days!” I did not say, “Because the bathroom exhaust fans are working now!”

There really is no way in scholarly discourse to announce that certain corners within the Crucible of Higher Learning no longer have a rather distinct and unmistakable odor that gets worse as the day goes on. But to our joy, after nearly two decades, the bathroom exhaust fans have been repaired.

The library does indeed look better these days. Not only that, it smells better. It smells of fresh paint and lemon wax and sometimes a sandwich or two, and the only other fragrance is… nothing. Just clean air, like our future.

VSTDPUs and Maslow’s Hierarchy

One of my favorite library stories comes from the days when small public libraries in upstate New York were being encouraged to go online. A consultant went to visit a small library–one of those Barbie Dream libraries that are hot in the summer, cold in the winter, and staffed so minimally that the library worker covering the single desk will excuse herself to change the toilet paper and greet the UPS delivery person.

So the consultant explained to the library director that the online catalog could do this, and it could do that, and it would have all these marvelous functions, and the library would be so much farther ahead, etc. etc.

And the practical old librarian who had been quietly listening tilted her head and replied, “I’d still rather have a flush toilet.”

Maslow's Hierarchy

Maslow's Hierarchy

I’ve been a fan of Maslow’s Hierarchy since my military days. I have a writing friend who I encourage by using an image of Maslow’s Hierarchy whenever I give her written feedback. I point out that her work is near the top of the hierarchy, at the peak of self-actualization, whereas less-accomplished writers are near the middle or even the bottom of that pyramid.

I think a lot about Maslow’s Hierarchy in terms of strategic direction for a library at a VSTDPU  (Very Small Tuition-Dependent Private University). We do have flush toilets at MPOW. (We do not have an exhaust system, as becomes unfortunately apparent as the day progresses, but that is beside the point.) But we provide the best services possible within a constant reality of resource challenges that would flummox librarians at larger institutions.

Part of that service provision includes a ruthless focus on Maslow’s Hierarchy. We do not have the resources to do anything that is not directly applicable to service provision. Furthermore, as discussed earlier, even among those options, we have to cherry-pick very carefully, and decide that some things are not doable, even if they are important. Among those services we elect to provide, we have to provide clear-eyed assessment, and be willing to minimize or stop a service.

It’s possible for a library to become so focused on a traditional problem, such as a large cataloging backlog, to the point where other services go neglected. One decision I have made is that our cataloging backlog, however spectacular it may be, is not the most pressing problem for us at this time. Improving access to and awareness of resources, improving the aesthetics and comfort of the facility, increasing the library’s visibility, communicating with our stakeholders,  assessing our performance, measuring user needs, and ensuring the library is seen as a valued part of the university rank much more highly.

Most important of all is addressing information literacy. This is the pure and acute vector of tremendous student need and one of our professional core competencies. This is particularly acute at Holy Names, where many students are the first generation in their family to attend college, and it’s particularly acute in California, where school libraries are not mandated and the public school system is a mess, and it’s greatly exacerbated by the complexity of the world of scholarly information, where nothing is intuitive (it never was, of course, but now it’s the full opposite of intuitive) and we are running alongside the whole mess, changing tires on moving vehicles.

This is all a long wind-up to make a small observation. A couple of weeks ago we got one of those whiz-bang product offers that come our way, and it’s one of those products that if we were perched higher up the hierarchy would be too good to pass up: it’s a service to enable smartphone access to our web resources. And an enthusiastic library advocate for this service gave me the Big Sell.

The punchline here is that we don’t yet have a website worth accessing. We have a page with a handful of links, and we have a slew of online subject guides created by our temporary part-time adjunct librarian who I really hope we get to keep and if we don’t, may she go forth and do great things. We haven’t had the time or resources for a website. (In fact, that reminds me… I need to draft another internship, based on that.) We pretty much have what we need to stay afloat day-to-day.

So when I finally said, you know, we are simply not going to do this now, I’m sure I came off as one of those unhip administrators standing in way of really cool things we should be doing. And if I were up the hierarchy a bit more–and so were our students–I’d agree with that statement. Enabling smartphone access on our campus has one additional problem: most of our students don’t have smartphones. (Plus the pricing, while not bad, had a screwy scale; if your FTE for a product begins at 5000, you don’t “get” our situation.)

So I was feeling doltish about feeling so tepid about this, and then several things happened.

The first is that a student came in and hung her artwork on a freshly-rehabbed–and-painted wall (until very recently the home of dusty shelving filled with unused periodical indexes), and it made the library beautiful. People kept remarking on it. It was, to use a word the National Science Foundation adores, transformative.

Then we had a poetry and art event, where we read poems about spring and libraries and even cannibals, and ate brownies and tangerines, and we all agreed we needed more events like that. We have held three literary events this spring; I don’t know how, but we’ve done it. We have one more big hoo-ha on April 20 where we are rolling out our spruced-up facility with an all-campus barbecue, and I’m not sure how we’re doing that, either.

And I spent quite a bit of time this week peeling yet more layers from the history (or puzzle) of info lit at MPOW, to try to understand where we are, how we got here, and what we can do to give our students the best information literacy experience possible.

And then I taught two info lit classes to grad students, and in each one I said, I think, budget willing, we’re going to be able to license this software tool that will allow you to gather all your scholarly citations into one account (the idea of citation-management software being almost unknown on campus, even to most faculty), and the students were fascinated and excited.

And meanwhile, the handful of folks who are with me on that lowest level of Maslow’s kept weeding, and teaching faculty how to use technology, and planning new-technology roll-outs, and running daily reports what need to be run, and the student workers showed up and did a magnificent job as always. And we were, and are, and will be, very cool in our own right.

Because of Libraries we can Say These Things

I have this long post drafted about Maslow’s hierarchy and priorities and this and that. I guess it’s ok. But tonight I sat in a circle with students, faculty, and other friends and supporters of Peanut U, and first we celebrated the artistic achievements of a student graduating this spring, whose art now graces the library’s walls, and then we read poetry.

We read poems about hope and love and friendship and sisters; cannibalism and death; life and rebirth.

And we ate brownies and tangerines and drank lemon soda and cheap wine, and it was good.

And someone even got the quiet joke of the madelines I had purchased (“Look, I have a memory coming on!”).

And this is what I read:

Because of Libraries We Can Say These Things

She is holding the book close to her body,
carrying it home on the cracked sidewalk,
down the tangled hill.
If a dog runs at her again, she will use the book as a shield. …

The book is a shield; the word is good. There are people who “get” why we need the Library as Place; why we need an intellectual center, a barycenter for our literary souls. For those people, I need provide no long-winded discussions of pyramids. For those people, a poem and a brownie will do.

The Genteel Lady’s Compleat Guide to The Domestick Art of Homebrewing

Saison du Mont

Saison du Mont, Big Brew 2009

Why don’t more women brew beer?

Women I consider capable of holding national office or even starting a new country have described to me how they stand by and watch men homebrew. I have also run into more than one woman at the homebrew store who was there to pick up the ingredients for the boyfriend’s brew day.

This may be because modern American homebrewing — a hobby that in the U.S. is legally only about thirty years old –  is dominated by men,  with the attendant big-batch, outdoorsy, size-matters, Gawd-you-won’t-believe-how-hard-this-is characteristics of masculinized cooking activities.

It’s not that women are sissies (although, full disclosure, I am strictly apres-ski when it comes to outdoorsy stuff), but that men-brewing-beer has become an incomprehensible cultural habit, like driving in circles to get a really good parking spot at the gym.

Yet once upon a time, it was the good housewife who milled the malted barley and brewed it with hops to make beer (afterwards giving it a good stir with her magic stick that impregnated it with yeast). In the 18th century, nearly 80 percent of all licensed brewers were women, and many ancient myths “credit the creation of beer to women,” as beer anthropologist Alan Eames noted some years back.

And she didn’t spend hundreds of dollars on fancy equipment, either… nor did she suspend all her other domestic activities to concentrate on her brewing… and she expected her beer to complement her other domestic products, such as the family dinner (if not breakfast and lunch, or even snack breaks for lactating mothers, for whom milk stout was recommended).

So, as a newbie who has nonetheless learned a few things in the past year, here are my insights for the woman who has considered homebrewing when the rainbow was enuff.

First, remember:   homebrewing is only cooking. Not only that,  it’s not particularly complex cooking.  If you can  clean your kitchen, use a measuring spoon, and make a grilled-cheese sandwich, you can make beer, right in the comfort of your kitchen.

If, like me, you like cookbooks, you’ll enjoy learning from the homebrew canon. The beginners’ books are Papazian and Palmer, and the Basic Brewing DVDs are fabulous. Cooking is very much visual technique — I once took a half-day class in cleaning and killing Dungeness crab, acquiring skills I’ll have for life — and seeing James and Steve sparge and vorlauf and lauter is worth the price of admission.

Plus don’t you feel a little happy inside saying “vorlauf” and “sparge”?

Beat the mystique. Many of the magic arts in homebrewing turn out to be simple crafts. I’ve read lengthy instructions for boiling  sugar with water. Cooks in the know call that a simple syrup. Some homebrewers will breathlessly suggest placing your ingredients on the counter to build a visual inventory before you begin brewing. Hello, mise en place?

Speaking of which, think food-friendly brewing. I love the great big India Pale Ales, I truly do.  On its own, or paired with a bold food such as blue cheese, a crisp, sassy, over-the-top-hopped glass of beer is a more interesting experience than just about any wine I could possibly afford.  But living in Germany, and near Belgium, for two years in the 1980s taught me that some beer styles pair beautifully with food. The current fad for hoppiest-brew-evah is fun, but if you’re thinking about integrating your beer into your cooking, look elsewhere — preferably toward Belgium (though several months back, dining at 121 in Providence, I paired a Pilsner Urquell on tap with a broiled duck leg, and can still taste the crisp-fruity malt tones mingling with the earthy gravitas of duck. Oh my…).

Despite all the huzzah over $300 brewpots and thousand-dollar “brewing sculptures,”  homebrew can be done fairly economically–at least cheaper than yachting or skydiving–and a lot of the equipment can be multi-purpose, such as my digital cooking thermometer and my humongous funnel.  My $69 starter kit has brewed some excellent beer (even after factoring in the occasional addition of a funnel or a replacement hydrometer), and because I know how to use measuring spoons, my bottle of sanitizer will last me til, hmmm, at least 2011.

If you have sunshine and space, you could even  grow hops. Like growing tomatoes at home, the point is less to save money (I once had a boss who calculated that his homegrown tomatoes cost about $5 each) but to enjoy truly fresh hops, something I experienced once, when a homebrew store clerk invited me to hold and crush a single dry hop flower from his garden.

Brew at the level that makes sense for you.   Moving to partial-mash or all-grain theoretically saves money, since grain is one-third the price of extract, but it more than doubles the amount of time you’ll spend brewing, and it introduces a complexity to the process that may not interest you.

It’s also ok to start with a mix — and to stay there, if that’s your speed. A good beer kit will produce far better beer than you’ll get at at most grocery stores, and kits are engineered to be close to foolproof. You will end up with five gallons of beer (contradicting my “brew small batches” suggestion), but if you watch your temperatures and keep everything clean, there’s a very good chance it will be five very decent gallons.

Your local homebrew store may have its own kits, and these generally make wonderful beer.  My first three beers were “kit beers” (an ESB, a porter, and E.J. Phair’s Phat Quail Ale).  There are also many, many good recipes, in books, on the web, and so on. I recently brewed a milk stout (despite no actual need for it, if you know what I mean) that came from a recipe scribbled on a recipe sheet by the owner of San Francisco Brewcraft.

Build brew projects into your household workflow. I don’t cook my dinners sequentially; the spinach, rice, and main course all come out at the same time. After several homebrewing sessions, I began questioning the sacrosanct “brew day” I kept  reading about (a project conducted out on the patio or in the garage, no less).

I did two five-hour partial-mash brew sessions on Saturday mornings before asking on a list, why can’t I break up this “day” into its components — mashing, and then brewing?

It turns out I can; I just need to cool the wort quickly and keep it sanitary (though how sanitary it really needs to be before a 60-minute boil is an interesting question).  Now brewing can be a background activity concurrent with other housewifely chores: dinner and cleanup for the mash, Saturday cleaning for the boil. I also do other things while I’m homebrewing, using the kitchen timer and notes to myself to stay on schedule. Heck, maybe I’ll skin a deer, or weave a new blanket… or not.

Take back that kitchen. Brew some beer today!

The Vision Thang: Barreling toward 2015

Last week I was asked to submit a written draft of our library’s Vision, like, pronto. This scared me to death, because I’ve done a lot of presenting and talking and so on, but I don’t have a Vision. (I have progressive lenses–quite reasonable at CostCo–but that’s not quite the same thing.)

But my boss said otherwise. She said she’d heard me talk about the vision and all I needed to do was write it down. And 18 hours later (two drives, a short sleep and shower, and two meetings in between), I had. It felt a little bit like those MFA assignments where after piffling for weeks if not months I put the pedal to the metal and got ‘er done–because the synthesis had happened elsewhere, slowly, over time.

The Vision is no big surprise. It is all very learning commons, flexible furniture, zoning for group study and quiet study, research lab rooms, study rooms, etc. If you follow me on Flickr, you can fill in the blanks.

Where I did go out on a limb was also no real biggy if you’ve been following trends. I wrote that by 2015 95% of our monographs (aka “books”) would be off-site in centralized mass storage.  (This is another reason I’m so keen on Navigator. I get it: centralize the books, mass our potential, and deliver scholarly monographs on demand. Smart!)

I thought this forecast was terribly daring because when I first began saying the paper-based book would be an anachronism in my lifetime (my *very long* lifetime… I hope, anyway) — circa 1998 — there were some who held my opinions askance.  But when I brought  up the whole centralized-mass-storage thing with a handful of peers (terribly unscientific, like I care), they didn’t bat an eye, and I don’t think they were pretending to be too cool for school.

(Which is interesting, because it’s not as if, sitting here right now, we have a place and a method to relocate this material, let alone retrieve it for use…)

For legacy print materials–the stuff clogging entire floors of library buildings– economics are with access, not ownership. The mechanisms will soon follow. These mechanisms won’t be free; dollar per dollar, access might not be cheaper, fully-managed, than ownership. But it will be better access, and better service.

At any rate, so my Vision is terribly mainstream, at least by my standards.Well, ok!

This put me in a reflective mood. One advantage of managing a library in a small, tuition-dependent university is that we don’t have time for the cruft. We cannot afford to be anything other than terribly efficient. So we need to constantly ask the questions: What services will we deemphasize? What will we emphasize? What do our users need? How do we know? What are the current best practices? What is the most important thing we need to be doing right now? How do we know?

We live in exciting times. I wish I always knew the answers to these questions. But I admit some joy in the quest.

It Ain’t Easy Being OCLC

An interesting kerfuffle has been brewing in LibraryLand.

Some library organizations have been using alternative utilities to catalog their resources, and now one of them expects their intended savings to be wiped out because OCLC wants to charge them a higher rate for batchloading than for those of us who pay OCLC for cataloging.

Meanwhile, a trustee, Larry Alford, has been making pleas for OCLC members to stay within the fold (see letter, linked in news article), warning us of no less than “apocalyptic” disaster if we subdivide LibraryLand into bibliographic duchees. Alford says he seeks our “advice and comment.” Since he has been taking his case to the public, I’ll respond in kind.

Also, to spice things up, an anonymous crank has been emailing librarians behind the scenes to remind them that OCLC’s trustees are fairly well compensated (you knew that, right? Alford got $55,000 in 2008 $58,000 in 2007, according to the IRS) and that Jay Jordan is paid very well. To which I respond in threefold: I assume that crank has a dog in this fight; trustee compensation is a complex issue; and I don’t care for Jay Jordan himself, but I would hope the leader of the One True Database would be well-compensated.

Regarding trustee compensation, the first issue is not whether trustees get a perk for what is probably a fairly significant work effort, but whether a paid trustee is the most strategic choice for a “hearts and mind” campaign by OCLC. Here’s a hint: No. The likelihood of a paid trustee changing my mind about OCLC’s business model is roughly equal to the likelihood of Anita Bryant selling me a glass of orange juice. OCLC needs to start using “real people” to tell the OCLC story. If it can’t find any, then it needs to figure out why that is.

The other problem with trustee compensation is that it further widens the gulf between OCLC and its membership. It doesn’t matter if the trustees sincerely believe that compensation has no influence; the perception is still there. Whether they feel close to us, we do not feel close to them.

Alford’s letter reinforces this sense of neglect when he suggests that OCLC is a truly healthy democracy–an opinion held by very few librarians I speak with at all levels of importance in LibraryLand, from small, poor libraries to ARLs. Alford asks:

Do we, as librarians, want to turn over WorldCat and the maintenance of the metadata that provides access to our library collections to companies that operate for the benefit and profit of their shareholders and their owners, or do we want to keep it as a part of the nonprofit membership collaborative governed by a librarian majority?

“Governed by a library majority?” I don’t want a for-profit company managing our content (oh wait… it’s too late; MPOW is SaaS-hosted), but this is a false dichotomy. OCLC has modified its membership participation model, but let’s not pretend the new organization has taken more than a few hesitant steps toward member enfranchisement. I have far more shareholder power in a publicly-held corporation than I do with OCLC. I want to change that, but that’s where it is now.

One other issue lurking beneath the surface is why libraries are straying from the fold, and what we, OCLC, should do about it. (I may be a disenfranchised voice, but I’m talking anyway.) Consider how much MSU was really saving. If they thought batchloading would be about $6,000 and OCLC wants to charge $31,000, and that wipes out a year’s savings, then the savings would be about $25,000. [See comments for clarifications about costs.]

To understand whether $25k [or $81k] is a lot or a little would require more information about the MSU library budget and services. In a normal year,  my take is it’s not that much for a library that size. But MSU, like many places, is in a dire place this year financially, so let’s assume that situationally, it’s a lot, and that there wasn’t any other place to find this money.

I understand the temptation of low-cost anything, but I think–and this is one conversation we all need to have, because what we think is important–that on behalf of the membership, OCLC was obligated to respond. Whether it responded correctly is another question.

I assume that the cost of any OCLC transaction doesn’t translate to its literal cost; my take, and correct me if I’m wrong, is that this cost is part of a complex cost model based on incentives to maintain good data, share resources, and so forth.

My assumption also includes the idea, whether correct or not, that the cost model for batch loading is intentionally priced very low  to encourage libraries to ensure their records are correctly synced with OCLC; it’s why the first batchload is free. With a competing utility available, batchloading appears to be a convenient end run around OCLC’s cataloging costs–but it was not designed for that purpose, and shouldn’t be used that way. That’s my assumption, at any rate, and I’d like to hear hear any other conversations around that.

This leads to this question: if organizations are having trouble staying within the fold (or perceive they have problems doing so), how should OCLC respond? (Alford, to his credit, asked that question, more or less.)  I really can’t imagine giving MSU on its own a break on the cost of OCLC cataloging, given that whatever a dire scenario is for MSU is normal operating procedures at Peanut U.

Offering differential batchloading costs is a form of punishment that hurts all of us if those libraries give up on OCLC altogether (though how much we are hurt is an interesting question), and it also paints OCLC as the big gorilla whose response is to simply put its competitors out of business. But there is nothing ethically wrong with redoing a cost model to offer libraries relief and encourage participation (and further increase the size of WorldCat).

For the next year or two, should OCLC consider lowering cataloging prices for everyone–which would mean curtailing other efforts? Has that idea been on the table at all, or any idea like it? Or are there other avenues of relief to pursue?

To run with this idea just a little longer, assuming OCLC offered some form of fiscal incentive that was not as cheap as Sky River but offered some relief, the question to those libraries tempted to use alternative services would then be whether they are willing to help underwrite the cost of an international membership organization or whether they are simply looking for the cheapest way to catalog. This parallels the arguments we make when we argue for the value of libraries: that we are more than the sum of the books on our shelves; we are a suite of services that enrich our users and connect them within the global information ecology. Some stakeholders agree, and others think we are a waste of money.  Like Alford, we are  the wrong people to be making the case for our services.

Note, batch loading would be unnecessary if we didn’t all have separate-but-equal databases to manage — a data model that must die, die, die. But for all the promise of web-scale management, we can’t kill that data model without trust in what comes next, and belief that we are in this together.

If it’s Wednesday, it must be Lent

I spent almost two weeks struggling with the Monster Cold that attacked My Place of Work, and really could only take one day off. This wasn’t about heroics; it was simply that there were too many important, entertwined events that my absence would have affected. And you know, that is not such a bad thing. So I stayed home for the worst day and used a weekend to try to get better.

We’re rounding the corner and heading toward the hiring for our Access Services position. I heard from a lot of new librarians that they would have applied if the position hadn’t been targeted at MLS students. Well, I had no idea what a bad economy we were dealing with! We had terrific candidates, some with MLS’s and some not. I wish everyone fortune on their journey and just regret that we can’t hire the lot of you.

Meanwhile, I’m body-surfing through a very busy week…. well, they are all busy… but am still riding on the joy of last week’s reading at the library, and many more wonderful things to come.

Beautiful house for rent in Myers Park, Tallahassee

We just dropped the rent! The Craigslist listing says $1200 but we agreed to $1150. (As I had suggested all along… but I digress.)

We are renting out the home we own in Tallahassee. It’s a 3-bedroom, 2-bath midcentury house with a sunroom and loads of lawn around it, making it very private. There’s a fireplace, hardwood floors, a great redone kitchen with a triple-fuel range (gas stovetop with power burner, electric/convection oven), dishwasher, washer/dryer, lots of nice details, plenty of closet space… we have been taking very good care of this house and plan to keep it that way. (We just redid the fireplace foundation and liner–not the sort of thing you can see, but it ensured that it continues to be a WORKING fireplace.) The windows were redone with cute white shutters that mean you don’t have to worry about “window treatments.”

A small back deck gives you a place to grill. There’s no garage but there’s off-street parking and frankly, you can park on the street as well without issue… it’s a quiet street.

We have an area manager who will be responsive to your needs, and we pay a guy to mow the lawn. Cats are welcome! The place is very convenient to FSU, FAMU, CCLA, downtown/civic center, New Leaf… and it’s situated on a side street that no one drives down unless they have a reason to be there. One of the joys of living there was taking daily walks or runs into Myers Park proper. It’s also within walking distance of the municipal pool (recently renovated). If you can walk a mile, you can even go to downtown parades without having to negotiate a parking spot.

If you’re on the fence while you look at a comparable rental, please feel free to bargain. Special consideration to librarians, writers, ministers, and homebrewers!

The View from the Moraga Steps

I’m in a motel in Oxnard, resting up before a funeral tomorrow. My uncle Bob died. I didn’t know him well — our family has a lot of gaps in its attachments — but he led a good strong life and died with his boots on, felled by a series of strokes that began hours after he worked his last Friday at his clinic. He was a doctor — a dermatologist — and he had spent more than half a century getting up and going to work with a smile on his face.

A couple of weeks ago I climbed the Moraga stairs. Not the fancy stairs with the lovely mosaic tiles, but the prosaic eastern stairs, mere concrete steps leading up to a perch on top of the world.

I generally don’t do heights. I’m fine with planes, but on my own two legs, or in a car, heights make me queasy. No miracle happened on my climb. I stayed queasy, eyes-down, creeping to the top and then down again with my hands and arms wound round the bannisters.

“Nice view, yes?” said a dapper man striding past me.

“Yes,” I squeaked, eyes downward. But I had seen the view, when I reached the top. It was an amazing 360 view of San Francisco near sunset on a chilly day, a well-water-clear view that spread out before me across city and ocean. It was the most amazing view, and I, a San Francisco native, had never seen it before.

Really, before I looked at the place we would rent, I had never heard of Golden Gate Heights (what I think of as the “lonely goatherd” section of the Inner Sunset). I had never climbed this hill. Seen this view. Walked these steps.

I think a lot these days about how to introduce people who have never known great libraries to this experience. It’s an interesting problem. If you have never climbed those stairs or seen those heights, what are your expectations?