Appraising the Deborah Jacobs revolution at Seattle libraries
They are changing fast, turning into neighborhood gathering places. Did we put too much emphasis on our glittering downtown branch, and does it have enough of the comforts of a bookstore?
In a brief announcement that surprised many, Seattle's City Librarian Deborah Jacobs has announced that she is leaving to join the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. She will embark on the task of bringing libraries to parts of the world that have limited access to books.
We owe Jacobs much, for she ushered in Seattle's now-famous new central library and administered the largest library building program in the nation. That program brought us new and remodeled branch libraries and the crown jewel of the system, the downtown Central Library, designed by the celebrated Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas.
Great architects must do more than create a visually spectacular structure. They must also make sure the building "works." Is it efficient, comfortable, and able to do the job for which it was intended? Moreover, the architect must give the clients what they ask for. Seattle wanted a landmark building: an icon, an image that would put Seattle on the world stage.
When the City was formulating a plan for the new Central Library, City Councilmember Richard McIver asked in a public meeting, "Just exactly what do we expect to happen in this new library?" Silence followed his question, suggesting that people were stumped or that all assumed they knew the answer. But had we really taken McIver's excellent question seriously, we may have give more thought to how libraries needed to be different to match our changing ways of living and relating to books.
Koolhaas gave the city what it asked for: national recognition, architectural awards, and a breathtaking structure that attracted 150,000 people last year. Of that number, 116,000 checked out books. Others came as tourists, street people, researchers — to study, do homework, or use computers. (Plus a few who just use the escalator to avoid a hillclimb.)
The number of users in the new branch libraries is even more impressive. New and remodeled buildings designed by local architects have attracted 350,000 people, checking out an amazing 646,000 books a year. That's six times more books than at the Central Library. These branches also provide access for meetings and serve as gathering places for the community.
The flourishing branch libraries raise an old question: Might it have made sense to concentrate more resources on branches, particularly in walkable urban centers where people live, real estate is less expensive, parking is easier, and there are more attractions from adjacent businesses?
Seattle's decision to create a central library where administration, book processing, and the major concentration of books would be stored contrasts with King County Libraries, which have decentralized their libraries. The county chose to locate book processing and administration in less costly real estate and to put books near where most people lived. Seattle placed these operations in a high-priced building and in the most congested and expensive real estate in the state.
Diantha Schull, executive director of Libraries for the Future, puts it this way: "Libraries today are less about the real estate necessary for storing books, and much more about being a public forum — a space for meetings, performances, gatherings, and centers for community communication." If we want our urban villages and urban centers to serve the community, then that may be where we need to put the emphasis.
Charlie Robinson, director emeritus of the Baltimore County Public Library, makes a related point, contending that the public is choosing the atmosphere of the new bookstores over public libraries. He advocates, powerfully, that public librarians must create an environment that will attract young children and keep them coming. He warns that bookstores could empty public libraries if they don't become more inviting and convenient to match the public's busy lifestyles.
One good example of Robinson's point is Third Place Books in Lake Forest Park. Visionary entrepreneur Ron Sher has created a comfortable, inviting bookstore with adjacent classrooms, a stage, a variety of restaurants, wi-fi, and meeting areas. The store also boasts a weekly program of events that provide almost daily attractions of book readings, music, or lectures. The proximity to other adjacent businesses appears to make such stores an attractive destination for busy people who want to mix books with other life routines. Moms with kids, seniors, students, average folks on their way to or from other errands come just to read, eat, study, fend off loneliness, talk about politics. And buy books.
Aside from the question about location, we must also ask how well Koolhaas's architecture works to create "comfortable and inviting spaces," as found in cozy bookstores.
Visually, Seattle's library is a stunner. Light appears to be everywhere, and the sky is the ceiling. Steel and glass and the planes of walls intersect and recede in every direction. It so excites the eye that you can't stop looking. The exterior is a unique structure. No mistaking it for an office tower, the library looks like a massive glass box that got stepped on by the gods and set down between streets.
Comments:
Posted Fri, Apr 25, 7:13 a.m. inappropriate
Thank You Deborah Jacobs: I can't think of a public official in the Seattle area over the last 40 years who has been more effective than Deborah Jacobs. I use the downtown library and one of the remodeled/enlarged neighborhood libraries regularly. I'm very happy with both of them. The neighborhood library, Columbia City, is so full of patrons especially children and teenagers that I often find it easier to head downtown and put up with slow busses or expensive parking. I view the crowd at Columbia City as a sign of success rather than a problem. I started using the downtown library for serious research a few years ago. I know many people do not like the user experience at the Main Library, but I do. It is a quantum leap over the dump it replaced and I find it a more comfortable place to work in than Sterling Memorial or the The Bancroft libraries which are the other two large libraries (much larger) in which I have logged long hours. Of course, my memories of those libraries are dulled by the passage of many years. I have found the library staff outstanding.
Thank you, thank you, thank you Deborah Jacobs.
Posted Fri, Apr 25, 8:07 a.m. inappropriate
Ephemeral libraries: I'm really struck how so many new libraries seem like impermanent facilities--the empty warehouse where you might house a dot-com start-up. They're interesting spaces (I'm thinking of the Ballard Library) but it's such a difference from the old libraries which emphasized permanence, either in solid Gothic edifices (like Suzzallo) or with oak furniture and shelves that seemed immovable (my childhood library in Columbia City is the archetype). I've wondered if this wasn't about more than just architectural style--a love affair with exposed ducts etc.--but reflective of the ephemeral nature of information and the library's role. And perhaps a kind of insecurity about that role: if we're not about books, what are we about? The downtown library seems like a mixed bag to me: a wonderful place to sit and read, a lousy place to look for a book (I bring my own). And so much of it seems arty, yet disposable. A landmark structure that's not built to last because no one can guarantee the future of libraries in this age.
Posted Fri, Apr 25, 9:38 a.m. inappropriate
Desperately Seeking Magnolia Branch Library: As a walking resident of Magnolia - I live here to be able to walk for all my basic needs - I have been distressed at the slow completion of our little jewel of a library.
The library staff we had - and I hope they aren't scattered to the wind - were (and still are, I'm sure) the most wonderful people. Helpful, knowledgeable, and a precious part of our neighborhood.
My husband and I are high-volume users of the library and we look forward to the reopening of our branch this summer.
If you want to see a prize-winning structure with amazing wood furniture, come by in the fall.
Now THAT's a "third place!"
Posted Fri, Apr 25, 9:40 a.m. inappropriate
Crosscut's Mixed Libe Review: Having seen and used the old classical Carnegie Library, its mundane '50s replacement and now the overly-famous Koolhaus creation, I'd have to agree with the mixed review given in Crosscut today. I was one of those local architects who urged Deborah Jacobs to emulate the Bellevue King County Library which I think is successful on all counts. Jerry Gropp Architect AIA PS
Posted Fri, Apr 25, 9:46 a.m. inappropriate
children's area: This is in response to the comment in the article that the children's section of the downtown library might have been better located at Seattle Center. The downtown children's section of the library is a huge resouce for the over 500 kids who are in daycare downtown. My 2 year old son and his class walk there every week for story time - something they wouldn't be able to do if it was at Seattle Center. My 8 year old (who went to same same downtown daycare) refers to the downtown library as "her" library. As a busy working parent, I find the great selection (and organization) of kids books to be far superior to that of my neighborhood library in Greenwood. The space itself was poorly designed - not sure if this is still true, but when it first opened, the special story area for kids was unusuable. I love the location of the downtown children's section, the number of books, the staff - but the space itself is another matter.
Posted Fri, Apr 25, 9:52 a.m. inappropriate
RE: Thank You Deborah Jacobs [for what ??!]: There's a lot that can be said about Ms. Jacob's impact at SPL, but "effective" does not always equal "positive." The downtown library is a triumph of form over function: one-way escalator, little or no consideration for the relationship among different spaces (e.g., the Seattle Collection with its card-file index of local newspapers is four floors away from the newspapers on microfilm), dreary meeting rooms, and on and on and on.
As for the new branches, they're a mixed bag. The rennovated Carnegies are great, but some of the new spaces are not. At least one, in Wallingford, is already bursting at the seams after just a few years; it's most useful as a delivery drop for books and other material ordered from other locations. It's one more example of poor planning.
Let's hope the next City Librarian pays more attention to the way people use our libraries, and less to making a design statement.
Posted Fri, Apr 25, 11:27 a.m. inappropriate
Neighborhoods terrific, downtown needs help: The neighborhood renovations have been a fantastic addition to this city. I've happily traveled to new neighborhoods to see the classy Carnegies remodeled and to enjoy the newer buildings like Ballard. Although all devote a bit more space to computers and a bit less space to books than I would like, but all are friendly, open, and comfortable places for readers and browsers.
Sadly, the downtown is not so hospitable a space. I used to make special trips downtown in the summer to check out the new fiction and then hang on the rooftop terrace of the last building to read and soak up some precious Seattle sunshine. You could grab a coffee there, and the terrace gave the impression of a "private" oasis in the middle of a noisy block. The rest of the building was dump but a pretty functional dump with a good solid business research section and so on.
The new library looks impressive on the outside but those tiny diamond windows actually block some of the best views in town. The books are oddly stored in fairly dark nooks and crannies. I have often wished that Central loaned out flashlights or miner's lighted helmets for those of us wishing to read the bottom shelves of adult fiction. As for the long escalator to the top, which whisks you by books walled off by glass, it conveys the overall feeling of Central to me. Look and please don't touch, just admire how expensive the building is.
Posted Fri, Apr 25, 11:40 a.m. inappropriate
RE: Thank You Deborah Jacobs [for what ??!]: I don't know John, I'm pushing 70 the technologically challenged generation, but I thought the card catalog was in a warehouse in Tukwila, because the card catalog I use when I'm at a micro-fiche reader or in the stacks is on my laptop and with me. Generally I've searched the card catalog the night before at home. Further, my doctor has told me to use the stairs. I cheat, I use the elevator to go up, but I do walk down.
Posted Fri, Apr 25, 2:28 p.m. inappropriate
RE: phemeral libraries: I agree the feel of the new buildings is very different. The new buildings don't feel less permanent to me, rather more open. However, I suspect the style has more to do with construction budgets than a statement about modernity or impermanence. The Libraries for All levy was relatively huge, but wasn't sufficient to build a bunch of new Carnegie buildings. The levy had to pay for a lot:
Completed
Broadview Branch - 2007
University Branch - 2007
Queen Anne Branch - 2007
Southwest Branch - 2007
Douglass-Truth Branch - 2006
South Park Branch - 2006
Montlake Branch - 2006
Northgate Branch - 2006
Lake City Branch - 2005
International District/Chinatown Branch - 2005
Ballard Branch - 2005
Fremont Branch - 2005
Greenwood Branch - 2005
Columbia Branch - 2004
Beacon Hill Branch - 2004
North East Branch - 2004
High Point Branch - 2004
Central Library - 2004
West Seattle Branch - 2004
Green Lake Branch - 2004
Rainier Beach Branch - 2004
Capitol Hill Branch - 2003
Delridge Branch - 2002
Wallingford Branch- 2000
NewHolly Branch - 1999
Still to come:
2008
Madrona-Sally Goldmark Branch
Magnolia Branch
Posted Fri, Apr 25, 3:02 p.m. inappropriate
RE: Thank You Deborah Jacobs [for what ??!]: The general card catalog is long gone, but the separate index of Seattle people, places and events, with pointers to specific newpaper articles and other resources has been mercifully saved. That's the card catalog up on the ninth floor.
As ar as I know, it's the only extant tool for searching the Seattle newspapers from the era before computer indexing. Longic would have placed that index someplace close to the bound and microfilmed newspapers, but the downtown library has hidden it for floors away.
Posted Sat, Apr 26, 10:31 a.m. inappropriate
LIBRARY BUDGETS: "...but wasn't sufficient to build a bunch of new Carnegie buildings."
Chicago built a traditional library after a well-publicized design
competition in, I believe, the mid 1990s. The winning design was patterned after a McKim Mead and White design of the late 19th century. Photos of the completed building look good and my recollection is that the cost was modest. So, if I take the above quote very literally, I believe it is inaccurate. The old-timers were actually pretty thrifty.
Posted Sat, Apr 26, 4:02 p.m. inappropriate
A mixed bag: • Jacob's tenure appears to have been A+ when it comes to keeping the Library free of partisan (i.e. Republican) meddling with the freedom to read. She very much deserves recognition for that.
• The Library's new buildings seems to have been developed with some degree of economic efficiency and apparent absence of scandal, which is a big plus, if you exclude what I understand are substantial but buried cost overruns on the Koolhaas adventure.
• Deborah's weak point has been her judgement as a strategic thinker. She ignored the potential for the Library's development to serve not just its own laudable ends but also broader and intensely critical issues of urban sustainability. My assumption is that in the rush to get stuff built, and get ink in the global press for the Central Library in particular, she and her staff just didn't want to take the time to think and so missed many opportunities to partner with private development in co-location.
For example, the Northgate Library is a suburban design of one-story with surface parking, large lawn etc etc in the very center of one of what will be one of the densest urban neighborhood. Go look at that Branch; it could well be in Belleveue of 1955. The Library missed an opportunity to build for own its own needs and also to provide opportunity to build (I would guess) at least a hundred apartments by densifying the site and building up in conjunction with a private developer. A similar opportunity was ignored on Beacon Hill; there may have been other such missed chances in other neighborhoods to have the Library site to accommodate not only the Library but residences. I am afraid that Jacob's get as "F" for sustainabie design and efficiency with public money.
Posted Sat, Apr 26, 4:28 p.m. inappropriate
More Glory than Guts.: With regard to the previous comments on the Central Library's mineshaft darkness and 'buried cost overruns,' the public can look forward to seeing some of these overruns on display in the near future as the attempt to change some lightbulbs that have been left burned out for years on end while the poor building and maintenance crew essayed to discover just how many of them it would take to screw one in. Quite a few, it turns out, as custom build scaffolding will need to be designed and erected.
I am in full agreement on the helpfulness of professional work ethic of most of the library staff I have spoken to, one of whom let loose the above detail, (minus the aggrieved tone, which is my own) when I got a little testy over my inability to read a book in the reading room. As for the building, it is magnificent, and staggeringly impractical. There is a nice flow of comments from Seattle library patrons in the Slate.com article referenced in the sidebar of this article.
Posted Tue, Apr 29, 1:48 p.m. inappropriate
RE: Thank You Deborah Jacobs [for what ??!]: Yeah, this is just flackery. I actually use the library system, and have for 30 years. The downtown library is ugly and useer-unfriendly; especially if you have a disability like I do.
Seattle's libraries are becoming community rec-rooms, not places where people can get info and check out books. Which is what I think libraries are for?
If Seattle wants to install community rec-rooms, why not make the rapacious and vulgar developers pay for these rec-rooms in exchange for letting them do their nasty stuff to the city?
A friend suggested the useless interior of the new downtown library be gutted, and build a larger than life version of the original Carnegie library inside the terrarium? Sounds good to me!