1

By David Rothman

imageimageHistorian Robert Darnton, the director of the Harvard University Library and author of The Case for Books, a valuable work in many ways, is right to worry about Google wreaking havoc on libraries.

But here’s one mystery about The Case. While delving into the evolution of books, Prof. Darnton devotes not one word to Project Gutenberg despite the project’s importance in the world of digitized books. Of less concern, since the TeleRead idea is just that, an idea for a well-integrated national digital library system, not an actual system, Darnton does not mention my own proposal despite its inclusion in a scholarly collection from MIT Press.

imageimage First, the Gutenberg situation. Michael Hart and I have not always seen eye to eye on things—he failed to support the TeleRead site in our battle for e-book standards—but let’s give him his due. He may or may not have been the first to digitize literature: I can’t say. But at the least he deserves major recognition for turning a process into a movement. Google even came to Michael for advice, and he wisely told the company it would be better PR to play up public domain books from the start. Big thanks to the sharp-eyed Gary Price of ResourceShelf for his commentary picking up the absence of Gutenberg and Hart mentions.

Now, the TeleRead angle. In The Case for Books. Darnton writes: “We could have created a National Digital Library—the twenty-first equivalent of the Library of Alexandria. It is too late now. Not only have we failed the possibility, but, even worse, we are allowing a question of public policy—the control of access to information—to be determined by private lawsuit.” That said, I’m very very grateful to Darnton for broaching the possibility, in his December 17 essay, that the Google books or at least orphaned works there could be turned into a public library, in effect (see yesterday’s TeleRead item, and meanwhile I’d remind people that I’m personally all in favor of strenuous efforts to assure proper compensation of writers and their estates when possible).

In fact, I’ve written Darnton to alert him about the TeleRead  idea—first made public in 1992—and my recent commentary in the Huffington Post. Perhaps some TeleRead-related concepts will be useful to him, and there is also the issue of credit. I hardly invented the idea of digital libraries, but TeleRead, to the best of knowledge, is still unique in its mix of approaches. TeleRead calls for a national initiative to popularize e-book-friendly hardware, as well as make multiple use of the hardware for tax forms and other purposes to cost-justify the initiative. It also advocates full integration of the digital library system with existing schools and libraries through such measures as relevant professional development for teachers and librarians. I’ve written about the evolving TeleRead idea not just in an MIT Press Information Science collection but also on the Washington Post op-ed page in and other publications such as Computerworld, not to mention all the zillions of references online.

Yes, it would be wonderful if, just as with Project Gutenberg, Darnton would grant TeleRead some recognition as well. The issue isn’t vanity; rather, practicality. Both the Gutenberg and TeleRead projects are not exactly swimming in cash, and recognition from the likes of Darnton would be good for both in terms of sustainability.

There is even some overlap between Project Gutenberg and TeleRead. I’ve long suggested that TeleRead could help supply money for citizen-driven digitization efforts like Gutenberg. And Gary Price, sensibly, writes: “Why couldn’t the scanning be spread out across various organization with a centralized database in place to help reduce duplication (the same titled scanned by one or more groups) and get the job done in a more expedited manner.” Exactly. With proper quality control mechanisms in effect—and let’s face it, even Google is hardly exemplary—why couldn’t some money go to the likes of Gutenberg and its sister group, Distributed Proofreaders, for such work? The issue isn’t just expediting. Rather I believe that digitization is too important to be left to the library and corporate worlds alone. Grassroots projects like Gutenberg could digitize their share of content that other initiatives might overlook. Here’s to a mix of models! Ideally, influential academics like Darnton will grasp the possibilities here.

 
1