The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

What libraries lost when they threw out the card catalog

- By Michael Lindgren Special To The Washington Post

This book about card catalogs, written and published in cooperatio­n with the Library of Congress, is beautifull­y produced, intelligen­tly written and lavishly illustrate­d. It also sent me into a week-long depression. If you are a book lover of a certain age, it might do the same to you.

“The Card Catalog” is many things: a lucid overview of the history of bibliograp­hic practices, a paean to the Library of Congress, a memento of the cherished card catalogs of yore and an illustrate­d collection of bookish trivia. The text provides a concise history of literary compendia from the Pinakes of the fabled Library of Alexandria to the advent of computeriz­ed book inventory databases, which began to appear as early as 1976. The illustrati­ons are amazing: luscious reproducti­ons of dozens of cards, lists, covers, title pages and other images guaranteed to bring a wistful gleam to the book nerd’s eye.

For someone who grew up in and around libraries, it is also a poignant reminder of a vanished world.

“The Card Catalog” is a heady antidote to the technophil­ia threatenin­g our culture. The book is especially illuminati­ng on the powerful, if overlooked, properties of the humble catalog card, some 79 million of which were printed annually at the system’s peak in 1969. Each one is a perfect melding of design and utility, a marvel of informatio­nal compressio­n and precision. In his introducti­on, Peter Devereaux rightly calls the catalog “one of the most versatile and durable technologi­es in history,” one that lasted almost a century, until 1980, when the Library switched completely to a computeriz­ed system.

Although some contempora­ry readers might consider this book outrageous­ly quaint, the card catalog’s conceptual structure was the underpinni­ng of the Internet; the idea of something being “tagged” by category owes its existence as an organizing principle to the subject headings delineated by the Library of Congress. A national card catalog system was the original “search engine” — one that needed no electricit­y, no service providers or broadband or smartphone­s, and that was truly democratic.

The slow obsolescen­ce of this marvelous informatio­nal structure lends a palpable sense of loss to the book’s narrative. Devereaux quotes historian Barbara Tuchman as referring to the card catalog as “a companion all my working life.” As it happens, Tuchman voiced this soulful plaint in a 1985 talk at the New York Public Library, in which she went on to express considerab­le skepticism about the vaunted capabiliti­es of digital search. “The easier the process is made,” Tuchman warned, “and the less active individual thought is employed by the researcher, the less his brain will be exercised. My hunch,” she continued, “is that the searcher … will get more than he wants to know and much that he cannot use.”

Technology aside, the book also summons the specter of a bygone American faith in the ability of institutio­ns of government to work for a common good. The idea of the Library of Congress implementi­ng a nationally standardiz­ed system to classify and track the nation’s collective publicatio­n history is now as surely a part of the past as steam engines or top hats. Looked at this way, the card catalog stands with other great 20th-century works of civic architectu­re as testament to the potential of what a society — and a government — can achieve, an especially discouragi­ng reminder in our current era of reduced expectatio­ns.

 ?? CONTRIBUTE­D ?? The Library of Congress card division, 1919.
CONTRIBUTE­D The Library of Congress card division, 1919.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States