Thursday, November 30, 2006

No Books!

1:28 a.m. / 01:28

The quote in my previous post is really just funny, especially in the context of the book I pulled it from, but it reminded me of something less funny.

I have been aware for quite a while now that many people around here only have library cards because the library has movies and music, in addition to books, but only in the past year, since I left the big library downtown for a branch (two different worlds) have I realized there's something worse than that. If an individual chooses not to check out books, that's one thing. But in the past year, I have repeatedly heard parents tell their excited, knowledge-hungry children "No, you're only getting movies today; no books!". Every time, it makes my co-workers and I cringe. Why? Why would you not allow your children to check out books? We have options for parents concerned about what movies their children are checking out, including a no movies at all, ever, option, but books? No books? If asked, these parents might say something about fines, but book fines are .05 per day, and movie fines are .50 per day, so movies are a much greater risk, fines-wise. I just cannot see the advantage to not letting the kids check out books.

Okay, I'm done with my rant now. I should probably mention that I am not a mom, so maybe I'm lacking some parental perspective, but it bothers my co-workers too, and most of them do have kids. Okay, I'm really done now.

Labels: ,

That is weird. Yesterday I went down to the "big library downtown" to get some DVDs I had on hold. When I first got in line, the older lady at the checkout couldn't find the DVDs, but since no one had actually called me (I noticed it online) she figured it may just have been put where she could find it yet. But, since the line was getting backed up, she asked if I minded coming back some other time. I had gone there expressly to get the DVD, since I didn't think I'd have a whole lot of time to get it later, so I said I wouldn't mind waiting for the line to go down a bit. While waiting (this is the real reason for this long comment) I saw a mother with 3 children, aging from about 10 to about 3. The 2 oldest each had a blue basket full of books and movies, and the mom had a handful under her arm for the youngest. They all had they're cards on lanyards around they're necks, and each put their own library spoils on the counter. Afterwards, the mom put all she could into the 2 green library bags she had brought, but coudn't fit it all in. Those kids, and only the oldest could read, really liked was kinda heartwarming to me. Plus the 2 youngest (the boys) were really cute. The youngest was trying to get his lanyard around his neck, but it had slipped down his arm, and he just stood there, getting tangled up in it. Anyways...I'm not even sure what I was ranting about anymore!
Oh yes, some kids do read...some parents do encourage them, even if all they do is look at pictures since they can't read yet. So, I guess we can't give up all hope just yet.
i could maybe see an arguement that the parent does the handling with a movie instead of the kid, who might damage a book. i don't think it's a good reason, but it's a possible explaination.

it reminds me of the time i was eating at a chinese buffet and there was a woman and her son filling a to-go buffet container. the boy, who was no more than 4 or 5, said, "look, broccoli!" and his mother told him, "i ain't getting no broccoli. we're getting meat." now, it's true that meat costs more so by getting all meat, you're getting more money worth of food, but not only is broccoli more healthy, how many parents try desperately to get their kids to eat the stuff and this woman won't let hers have any.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?