Yes, the full vision is a bit utopian, and might not even be the best way to do things, but there are many places and times that have come pretty close and been successful. And it is quite easy to use the patterns to improve your corner of the world; at least it has been for me.
And on danish libraries: I love them. Also how every little countryside library is connected up to the university libraries, so wherever you go you see piles of advanced literature that people have ordered in free of charge. It makes it viable to have an intellectual life anywhere you live in the country, which is very hard in most countries. Also I love that they trust people to enter when it is unstaffed, which makes it much more accessible. Ah! Going into a closed library, turning the lights on and sitting down to work!
Also enjoyed the thoughts on the value of making things inaccessible to make them sacred, or high achieving. That is something to keep in mind—how can we make spaces that filter people out, and prime them for a certain seriousness, in a fair and open way, that does not unnecessarily limit playfulness?
I have been following lesswrong for some time, but this is my first comment. Both your comments on libraries in relation to Henrik’s superb text on Alexander was the inspiration. As a Brit living in Finland, I have noted how 800 libraries have closed in the UK since 2000 (source: Guardian, 6.12.2019). The picture is much better here in Finland, especially in Helsinki; but there is a new trend developing, keyed into the eductation system generally. The stand-out example is Helsinki’s new city library, called Oodi, where, much like the examples given by Maris, the building is not a library in the traditional sense: only one of 3 floors dedicated to books, but even much of that space taken up by “lounge space”, while the rest of the building is comprised of “fab labs”, areas of machines for fabrication (eg. sewing machines) metal and woodworking , banks of computers, film-making equipment, as well as “cubicles” bookable as office spaces. And even in-house advisors to help out those in need of assistance. Would Alexander have approved? But the fear is, that with all these activities happening in a single “super active” building in the very heart of Helsinki, branch libraries are under threat and other less glamorous activity locations will close. This has already happened in the case of the Helsinki film archive which has been moved to the building. To give a parallel example, the library designed by Alvar Aalto for the former Helsinki University of Technology (nowadays Aalto University) has been “converted” into a “learning centre”: the space for open-shelf books has reduced considerably [even the few staff remaining argue that students get nearly all their sources online], and more space given to a fab-lab, virtual-reality workshops, but with the building’s central space given over to … a cafe. This can all be explained away as a new attitude to libraries. Yet my own favourite library is the Finnish National Library, a building where books are still central and where “silence” still reigns: that might also explain why it is mostly empty and underused.
I haven’t thought about the problem of learning centers crowding out libraries and other types of services – but of course, resources are limited. I think both are great if you can afford it. Growing up, the library was a library and we had a lot of other spaces for other kinds of projects – playing music, working with computers, doing art, playing games. That was great. I think C Alexander would have been in favor of it all. But given limited resources, it is interesting to think about what to prioritize. I might be ok with letting libraries go if need be – as long as there are rooms for silent studies. My local library now is mostly a small box in the countryside where I go to pick up books I order from bigger university libraries, and I can live with that. But I really wouldn’t be happy without spaces where I can bring my kids to do interesting stuff.
Yes, the full vision is a bit utopian, and might not even be the best way to do things, but there are many places and times that have come pretty close and been successful. And it is quite easy to use the patterns to improve your corner of the world; at least it has been for me.
And on danish libraries: I love them. Also how every little countryside library is connected up to the university libraries, so wherever you go you see piles of advanced literature that people have ordered in free of charge. It makes it viable to have an intellectual life anywhere you live in the country, which is very hard in most countries. Also I love that they trust people to enter when it is unstaffed, which makes it much more accessible. Ah! Going into a closed library, turning the lights on and sitting down to work!
Also enjoyed the thoughts on the value of making things inaccessible to make them sacred, or high achieving. That is something to keep in mind—how can we make spaces that filter people out, and prime them for a certain seriousness, in a fair and open way, that does not unnecessarily limit playfulness?
Dear Maris and Henrik,
I have been following lesswrong for some time, but this is my first comment. Both your comments on libraries in relation to Henrik’s superb text on Alexander was the inspiration. As a Brit living in Finland, I have noted how 800 libraries have closed in the UK since 2000 (source: Guardian, 6.12.2019). The picture is much better here in Finland, especially in Helsinki; but there is a new trend developing, keyed into the eductation system generally. The stand-out example is Helsinki’s new city library, called Oodi, where, much like the examples given by Maris, the building is not a library in the traditional sense: only one of 3 floors dedicated to books, but even much of that space taken up by “lounge space”, while the rest of the building is comprised of “fab labs”, areas of machines for fabrication (eg. sewing machines) metal and woodworking , banks of computers, film-making equipment, as well as “cubicles” bookable as office spaces. And even in-house advisors to help out those in need of assistance. Would Alexander have approved? But the fear is, that with all these activities happening in a single “super active” building in the very heart of Helsinki, branch libraries are under threat and other less glamorous activity locations will close. This has already happened in the case of the Helsinki film archive which has been moved to the building. To give a parallel example, the library designed by Alvar Aalto for the former Helsinki University of Technology (nowadays Aalto University) has been “converted” into a “learning centre”: the space for open-shelf books has reduced considerably [even the few staff remaining argue that students get nearly all their sources online], and more space given to a fab-lab, virtual-reality workshops, but with the building’s central space given over to … a cafe. This can all be explained away as a new attitude to libraries. Yet my own favourite library is the Finnish National Library, a building where books are still central and where “silence” still reigns: that might also explain why it is mostly empty and underused.
Gareth Griffiths
Thank you, Gareth.
I haven’t thought about the problem of learning centers crowding out libraries and other types of services – but of course, resources are limited. I think both are great if you can afford it. Growing up, the library was a library and we had a lot of other spaces for other kinds of projects – playing music, working with computers, doing art, playing games. That was great. I think C Alexander would have been in favor of it all. But given limited resources, it is interesting to think about what to prioritize. I might be ok with letting libraries go if need be – as long as there are rooms for silent studies. My local library now is mostly a small box in the countryside where I go to pick up books I order from bigger university libraries, and I can live with that. But I really wouldn’t be happy without spaces where I can bring my kids to do interesting stuff.