Laurabelle's Blog

This article highlights the differences between librarians and book collectors:

During our conversation, we debate the importance of libraries. Baxter says, yes, he really does hate them - they're like mausoleums. When I suggest that libraries preserve and make available to the public the books that collectors would hoard away, Baxter admits that as a biographer, he has to use libraries for his work. When pressed, he will admit it's easier to get hold of books in libraries than in the hands of other private collectors - as he discovered when trying to get information for his Kubrick biography from Kubrick collectors. But I get the feeling Baxter really wants to own the books he wants.

This book collector, Baxter, has a very narrowly-defined view of what defines a collectible book; he wants a certain edition in a certain condition and such, only because of the rarity and value of it. To him, the object is more important than the information; while libraries do alter books in order to circulate them, that does not destroy the information in them. In fact, those alterations could possibly make a book more valuable to future generations, by providing information about library practices of our era. Who knows?

Furthermore, it seems to me that Baxter is either hypocritical or selfish. He wants access to information, which requires him to use libraries; however, he would rather own the materials and not allow anyone else access to them, just like other collectors won't allow others access to their collections.

If I ever had any inclination towards book collection, this has turned me off. I love a pristine book as much as anyone else, but books are for sharing information, not for hoarding. A perfectly-preserved book is useless if no one is allowed to read it.