0

By

One of the biggest arguments for TeleRead is the need to make certain that even in the meanest urban neighborhood, even in the most remote fishing village in Alaska, people can access thousands of books from their own homes.

Many residents of Washington, DC, certainly could use TeleRead. In today’s Washington Post, columnist Marc Fisher tells of the miserable condition of the DC library system, especially the branches:

“I searched for the kind of books that could open new worlds to young people who lead lives of utter isolation, teenagers who have never been to the Mall, let alone the ocean or a mountaintop. I looked for Emerson and Melville, Hemingway and Ellison, Joyce and Mailer, Fitzgerald and Wideman, and in branch after branch, I came up empty or close to it…

“The library system has been slashed to 0.6 percent of the city’s budget, compared to a national average of 1.5 percent,” he writes. Even the 1.5 percent is hardly sufficient.

Meanwhile, as a Seattle clip shows, the well-to-do have a better-than-ever selection of books to enjoy via Amazon.com. The answer isn’t to destroy the Amazons but at least make life a little fairer for people without the Amazon.com alternatives.

Here in Northern Virginia, I find myself using Amazon.com and the near-by Fairfax County library system because the one in Alexandria is so inferior for my purposes. It isn’t like DC’s: the buildings are in better shape. But even at the grand new headquarters library, the collection is lacking.

I wouldn’t be surprised if part of Alexandria’s problem, not all of it, is the same as in DC. A fortune spent on desktop computers. Not enough for books even if the per-capita figure stacks up much better against some other places than I’d have expected (though they are pitiful compared to Cleveland or Boston).

Of course we need computers and books alike. TeleRead would be a way of making books more popular in the online world to which so many children are drawn these days.

 
0